Allowed

Smt.a.Parkavi, v. the Director

Madras HC16 Oct 2019WP(MD)/10043/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This is a batch order where the Madras High Court allowed writ petitions filed by various school employees. The Court quashed a refusal order by the Chief Educational Officer and directed the respondent authorities to resubmit the appointment proposals to complete the process within two weeks. No costs were awarded. No case was cited in the order. The petitioners name is not mentioned in the summa

What did the court decide?

Impugned return order by second respondent is quashed. Fourth respondent directed to resubmit proposal within two weeks. Second respondent directed to pass orders within two weeks thereafter. No costs

Smt.a.Parkavi, Vs the Director — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.10043 of 2019

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED: 16.10.2019 CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI W.P(MD)Nos. 10043 to 10052 of 2019 and Connected miscellaneous petitions

¶5

Smt.A.Parkavi ... Petitioner in WP(MD).No.10043 of 2019 P.Karthick ... Petitioner in WP(MD).No.10044 of 2019 D.Karthik ... Petitioner in WP(MD).No.10045 of 2019 B.Jayanthi ... Petitioner in WP(MD).No.10046 of 2019 S.Aravindhan ... Petitioner in WP(MD).No.10047 of 2019 Smt. P.Punitha ... Petitioner in WP(MD).No.10048 of 2019 K.Alagar ... Petitioner in WP(MD).No.10049 of 2019 R.Vasantha Kumar ... Petitioner in WP(MD).No.10050 of 2019 K.Ragunathan ... Petitioner in WP(MD).No.10051 of 2019 R.Mala ... Petitioner in WP(MD).No.10052 of 2019 - Vs. -

¶6

The Director, School Education Department, Dpi Campus, College Road, Chennai.

¶7

The Chief Educational Officer O/o. the Chief Educational Officer, Madurai Road, Trichy - 8

¶8

3.The District Educational Officer, O/o. the District Educational Officer, Old District Collectors Office Campus,

¶9

Cantonment, Trichy - 1.

¶10

National College Higher Secondary School, Rep. by its

¶11

Secretary, College Road, Chatram Bus Stand, Tiruchirappalli 620 002.

¶12

...Respondents in All Cases Prayer in WP(MD).No.10043 of 2019 :

¶13

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a Writ of

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

1/7

¶16

W.P(MD)No.10043 of 2019

¶17

Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in O.Mu.No.6646/A3/2018, dated .02.2019 signed on 07.02.2019 is illegal and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 herein to grant approval for the appointment of petitioner as Record Clerk in the 4th respondent school w.e.f. 25.05.2018 with all attendant and monetary benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance.

¶18

Prayer in WP(MD).No.10044 of 2019 :

¶19

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in O.Mu.No.6648/A3/2018, dated .02.2019 signed on 07.02.2019 is illegal and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 herein to grant approval for the appointment of petitioner as Office Assistant in the 4th respondent school w.e.f. 25.05.2018 with all attendant and monetary benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance.

¶20

Prayer in WP(MD).No.10045 of 2019 :

¶21

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in O.Mu.No.6651A/A3/2018, dated .02.2019 signed on 07.02.2019 is illegal and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 herein to grant approval for the appointment of petitioner as Sweeper in the 4th respondent school w.e.f. 25.05.2018 with all attendant and monetary benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance.

¶22

Prayer in WP(MD).No.10046 of 2019 :

¶23

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of

¶24

2/7

¶25

W.P(MD)No.10043 of 2019

¶26

Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in O.Mu.No.6653/A3/2018, dated .02.2019 signed on 07.02.2019 is illegal and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 herein to grant approval for the appointment of petitioner as scavenger in the 4th respondent school w.e.f. 25.05.2018 with all attendant and monetary benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance.

¶27

Prayer in WP(MD).No.10047 of 2019 :

¶28

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in O.Mu.No.6649/A3/2018, dated .02.2019 signed on 07.02.2019 is illegal and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 herein to grant approval for the appointment of petitioner as Office Assistant in the 4th respondent school w.e.f. 25.05.2018 with all attendant and monetary benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance.

¶29

Prayer in WP(MD).No.10048 of 2019 :

¶30

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in O.Mu.No.6645/A3/2018, dated .02.2019 signed on 07.02.2019 is illegal and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 herein to grant approval for the appointment of petitioner as Library Clerk in the 4th respondent school w.e.f. 25.05.2018 with all attendant and monetary benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance.

¶31

Prayer in WP(MD).No.10049 of 2019 :

¶32

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶33

3/7

¶34

W.P(MD)No.10043 of 2019

¶35

Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in O.Mu.No.6644/Aa3/2018, dated .02.2019 signed on 07.02.2019 is illegal and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 herein to grant approval for the appointment of petitioner as Junior Assistant in the 4th respondent school w.e.f. 25.05.2018 with all attendant and monetary benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance.

¶36

Prayer in WP(MD).No.10050 of 2019 :

¶37

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in O.Mu.No.6650/Aa3/2018, dated .02.2019 signed on 07.02.2019 is illegal and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 herein to grant approval for the appointment of petitioner as Waterman in the 4th respondent school w.e.f. 25.05.2018 with all attendant and monetary benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance.

¶38

Prayer in WP(MD).No.10051 of 2019 :

¶39

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in O.Mu.No.6647/AA3/2018, dated .02.2019 signed on 07.02.2019 is illegal and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 herein to grant approval for the appointment of petitioner as Office Assistant in the 4th respondent school w.e.f. 25.05.2018 with all attendant and monetary benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance.

¶40

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶41

4/7

¶42

W.P(MD)No.10043 of 2019

¶43

Prayer in WP(MD).No.10052 of 2019 :

¶44

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in O.Mu.No.6652/Aa3/2018, dated .02.2019 signed on 07.02.2019 is illegal and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 2 and 3 herein to grant approval for the appointment of petitioner as junior assistant in the 4th respondent school w.e.f. 25.05.2018 with all attendant and monetary benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance

¶45

(in all cases)

¶46

Since the issues involved in these Writ Petitions are one and the same and therefore, these Writ Petitions are heard together and disposed of by way of this common order.

¶47

2.These writ petitions are filed challenging the return of the second respondent, returning the proposal for approval of appointment of the petitioners, submitted by the fourth respondent through the third respondent to the second respondent.

¶48

According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the petitioners are working as Record Clerk, Office Assistant, Sweeper, Scavenger, Office Assistant, Library Clerk, Junior Assistant, Waterman, Office Assistant and Junior Assistant in the fourth respondent School and they were appointed on 25.05.2018 in a sanctioned posts due to voluntary retirement of V.Santhanam, retirement of A.Mahamuni, Promotion of S.Akila, death of M.Maruthai, Death of S.Sankaran, retirement of R.Rajyaiyan, promotion of K.Rajini, retirement of S.Venkatesan, retirement of M.Mohammed Ismail and retirement of G.Kannan respectively. The fourth respondent sent a proposal to the third respondent for approving the appointments of the petitioners. The third respondent returned the proposal on two occasions, raising certain queries. The fourth respondent after rectifying the queries pointed out by the third respondent, resubmitted the proposal to him. The third respondent after verifying the proposal submitted by the fourth respondent and finding the same in order, forwarded the same to the second respondent. The second respondent returned the said proposal, raising the very same queries raised by the third respondent, which

¶49

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶50

5/7

¶51

W.P(MD)No.10043 of 2019

¶52

were already complied with by the fourth respondent. The action of the second respondent, in returning the proposal, relying on G.O.Ms.No.238, School Education (D1) Department, dated 13.11.2018 is not valid and legal. The petitioners were appointed in May 2018 much prior to the date of G.O.Ms.No.238, School Education (D1) Department, dated 13.11.2018. The intention of the second respondent is only to prevent the petitioners from receiving the salary as per the aid granted and prayed for approving the appointments of the petitioners in the sanctioned post as stated above with effect from their date of appointment with attendant and monetary benefits including the arrears of salary and allowance.

¶53

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 and perused the materials available on record.

¶54

From the materials on record and typed set of papers filed in the writ petitions, it is seen that the proposal sent by the fourth respondent for approving the appointments of the petitioners was returned by the third respondent twice and subsequently, it was resubmitted by the fourth respondent after rectifying the queries raised by the third respondent. The third respondent after finding the same in order, forwarded the same to the second respondent. The second respondent, on erroneous consideration, returned the said proposal for raising certain queries when the third respondent after being satisfied with the proposal submitted by the fourth respondent is in order. From the typed set of papers, it is seen that the petitioners have filed all the documents.

¶55

For the above reasons, the impugned return order passed by the second respondent is quashed and the fourth respondent is directed to resubmit the proposal, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order along with documents to the second respondent through the third respondent. On such resubmission of proposal by the fourth respondent, the second respondent is directed to pass orders on the proposal, within a period of two weeks thereafter.

¶56

In the result, all the writ petitions are allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶57

Sd/-

¶58

Assistant Registrar // True Copy //

¶59

Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶60

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶61

6/7

¶62

W.P(MD)No.10043 of 2019

¶63

¶64

1.The Director, School Education Department, D.P.I.Campus, College Road, Chennai. 2.The Chief Educational Officer, Office of the Chief Educational Officer, Madurai Road, Trichy-8. 3.The District Educational Officer, Office of District Educational Officer, Old District Collector's Office Campus, Cantonment, Trichy-1. 4.The Secretary, National College Higher Secondary School, College Road, Chatram Bus Stand, Tiruchirappalli 620 002. +1cc to M/s.Special Government Pleader,SR.No. 92473 W.P(MD)Nos. 10043 to 10052 of 2019 16.10.2019

¶65

KK/SAR/05.11.2019/7P-6C/

¶66

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶67

7/7

Smt.a.Parkavi, v. the Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt.a.Parkavi, v. the Director

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Adi-Dravidar Primary School, Vs the Government of Tamilnadu

Chinnammal Vs Balachandran

A.Devaraj Vs Atulya Misra

G.Vivekananthan Vs the General Manager

C.Babu Rajan, Vs the Secretary

V.Megavarnam, Vs the Commissioner