The High Court of Madras dismissed a writ appeal filed by the Government of Tamil Nadu against a single Judge's order directing an unqualified Vocational Instructor to undergo short-term training to qualify for regularization, upholding earlier Division Bench and Supreme Court precedents.
Writ Appeal dismissed. No costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 02.01.2019
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
W.A.No.2803 of 2018
C.M.P.No.23265 of 2018
Prayer: Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order made in W.P.No.22810 of 2015, dated 18.05.2017.
Prayer in W.P.No.22810 of 2015:- Petition filed U/A 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Mandamus directing the respondents to send the Petitioner for short term training course of the concerned District Institute of Educational Training (DIET) within a stipulated time as may be fixed by this Honourable Court and regularize the service of the Petitioner as full time vocational instructor in terms of G.O. (Ms).No.834 Education Department dated 23.09.1994 and G.O.(Ms). No.358 School Education Department dated 18.8.1997 with effect
from initial date of appointment besides pay all the arrears within a short date that may be fixed by this Honourable Court with all consequential service benefits such as due placement in the seniority on the basis of length of service.
For Appellants : Mr.C.Munusamy Special Govt. Pleader (Education)
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by S.MANIKUMAR, J)
Instant writ appeal is filed against the order made in W.P.No.22810 of 2015, dated 18.05.2017, by which, the Writ Court has directed the Chief Educational Officer, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri, 4th appellant herein, to send the respondent herein, for short term training course to the concerned DIET, as per G.O.Ms.No.834, Education Department, dated 23.09.1994, within the stipulated time.
K.M.Gunasekaran and 24 others v. The Government of Tamil Nadu and 18 others.
Heard the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the appellants and perused the materials available on record.
"8. We have heard the counsel for both sides and perused the materials placed on record. It is the vehement contention of the appellants that the writ petitioners do not possess the requisite qualification for being considered for regularisation of their service. It is noticed from the order passed by the Government in G.O.Ms.No.358, School Education Department, dated 18.08.1997 that the Government has directed to impart a short term training for those who do not possess the requisite qualification or those
who are not qualified and thereafter to regularise them. On the basis of the aforesaid order passed by the Government, large number of unqualified Vocational Instructors were sent for training and thereafter they were regularised in service. When an order was passed by the Government conferring certain concession to similarly placed persons, it has to be extended to all those who are entitled to such concession.
"5. Heard Mr. S. Sampathkumar, learned Special Government Pleader (Education) for the petitioners and Mr.V.Bharathidasan, learned counsel taking notice on behalf of the respondents. In our opinion, of course, the Court should extend the benefit to the persons who are vigilant and approach the Court on time, for such reliefs. But the fact remains that a large number of Vocational Instructors were appointed and when the question of regularisation came up for consideration before the Government earlier, the Government, as a one time measure, regularised all those who possessed the minimum educational qualification. Later, realising the difficulties experienced by the other Vocational Instructors, who are not qualified, again, the Government, as a one time measure, extended the benefit of regularisation, but imposing a condition that those persons should undergo a short term training. This Government Order is applicable to all those who are working as Vocational Instructors without qualification. In all fairness, when a list was forwarded for training, the respondents' name should have also been sponsored. But, for some reason or the other, the names of the respondents have not
been sponsored for training. But the delay cannot be given that much importance, thereby affecting the right of the respondents. So long as the Government Order grants certain benefits to unqualified Vocational Instructors, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the learned single Judge applying the said Government Order after rejecting the stand of the Government that the respondents had not approached the Court on an earlier point of time. Hence, we find no merit to entertain these appeals. Accordingly, the writ appeals are dismissed. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.
skm
Sd/Assistant Registrar
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Govt.of Tamil Nadu, rep.by its Secretary, Education, Science & Technology (H &II), Dept., Chennai - 9. 2. The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai- 6. 3. The Joint Director of School Education, Vocational Education, College Road, Madras - 6. 4. The Chief Educational Officer, Krishnagiri District +1cc to the Govt.Pleader, High Court,Madras,Sr.No.1043
W.A.No.2803 of 2018 Vgv(CO) Kak(29/03/2019)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Division Bench's earlier order regarding regularization and short-term training for unqualified Vocational Instructors should be followed.
Whether the writ appeal against the single Judge's order directing the respondent for training merit interference.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
K.M.Gunasekaran and 24 others v. The Government of Tamil Nadu and 18 othersFollowed¶21
W.P.No.18183 of 2013, dated 04.07.2013
WA (MD) No. 1233 of 2013Distinguished¶30
S.L.P. (Civil) Nos. 11338 and 11339 of 2014Referred¶36
Government of Tamil Nadu
Director of School Education, Chennai
Joint Director of School Education, Chennai
Chief Educational Officer, Krishnagiri District
K.S. Saravanan
S.MANIKUMAR
SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
