In an appeal against an order granting promotion to a teacher, the High Court held that the authorities' negligence in late service register entry did not barring the teacher from being included in the panel prepared later in the year. The appeal was dismissed.
The Writ Appeal is dismissed and the connected Civil Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
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 :02.09.2021
CORAM
The Hon'ble Mrs.Justice Pushpa Sathyanarayana
and
The Hon'ble Mr.Justice Krishnan Ramasamy
W.A. No.559 of 2020
and
C.M.P.No.7936 of 2020
... Appellants vs
Writ Appeal filed under clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order, dated 05.12.2019, passed in W.P.No.32577 of 2019. Prayer in W.P.No.32577 of 2019 :-
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing
the respondents herein to issue the Panel for promotion as BT Assistant (Science) in Thiruvallangadu Union as on 1.1.2019 by including the name of the petitioner at Sl. No.1 therein and to promote her in the existing vacancy in Panchayat Union Middle School Rangapuram Thiruvallangadu Union Tiruvallur District and grant her consequential benefits.
For Respondent-1 : Mr.M.Ravi For Respondent-2 : Served No appearance
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by Krishnan Ramasamy, J.,)
This instant Appeal has been filed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge, in W.P.No.32577 of 2019, dated 05.12.2019.
For issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents/appellants to issue the Panel for promotion as BT Assistant (Science) in Thiruvallangadu Union as on 01.01.2019 by including the name of the first respondent/writ petitioner at Sl.No.1 therein, and to promote her in the existing vacancy in Panchayat Union Middle School, Rangapuram, Thiruvallangadu Union, Thiruvallur District, and to grant consequential benefits.
ii) The Writ Court, after hearing the learned counsel for both sides, allowed the Writ Petition. Challenging the said order, the respondents therein filed the present Writ Appeal.
purpose, the third appellant is duty bound to verify all records/certificates submitted by the first respondent. Though the first respondent/writ petitioner claims that she has completed B.Sc. Chemistry in February, 2018 itself, as she has not produced the certificate in respect of the said degree, and also failed to enter her qualification in the service register, on the date, on which, crucial date was fixed for drawing the panel, i.e. 01.01.2019, she is not entitled to seek for inclusion of her name in the panel. In fact, the first respondent/writ petitioner made a representation to the Block Educational Officer (B.E.O.), through the Head Mistress to enter the qualification of B.Sc. (Chemistry) in the service register only on 05.01.2019. Based on the said request, B.E.O. forwarded the said letter, on the same day itself, (i.e. on 05.01.2019) to the Registrar, Periyar University, Salem, to issue genuineness certificate. The same was issued on 11.04.2019. Finally, the first respondent's qualification was entered in the service register on 08.08.2019. Therefore, the learned State Government Counsel submitted that, on the date on which, the panel was drawn, i.e. 01.01.2019, the first respondent's qualification was not entered in the service register, and therefore, her name was not included in the panel. The said vital aspect was not considered by the Writ Court in a proper perspective and it has lost sight of the same. Therefore, the learned State Government Counsel submitted that the order passed by the learned Single Judge is liable to be set aside.
qualification in the service register. Aggrieved over the said non-inclusion, the first respondent was constrained to approach the Writ Court to vindicate the constitutional right enshrined under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Writ Court, considered all these aspects in a proper perspective, allowed the Writ Petition and directed the respondents/appellants herein to include the first respondent's name in the panel drawn for promotion to the post of B.T. Assistant as on 01.01.2019. Therefore, the learned counsel submitted that the said order is a well-reasoned order and requires no interference.
7.1 Further, to buttress the fact that the first respondent made such representations, a letter of the Head Mistress, S.Sankari, Panchayat Union Primary School, Thiruvallangadu, dated 29.09.2020 addressed to the appellants herein is filed in the form of Index to Typed Set of Papers at page No.11, wherein, it is stated by the Headmistress that she received the representation from the first respondent on 27.11.2018, and the same was forwarded to the B.E.O., intimating that the first respondent has successfully completed her B.Sc Degree on February, 2018 through Distance Education mode from Periyar University, Salem, enclosing the relevant certificate for appropriate action. Further, in the said letter, dated 29.09.2020, the Headmistress, S.Sankari, also stated about the receipt of the first respondent's representation, dated 04.01.2019, and forwarding the same to B.E.O on 05.01.2019.
7.2 Thus, a perusal of the documents would clearly reveal that the first respondent/writ petitioner had completed B.Sc degree (Chemistry) as early as on February, 2018, even before the panel for promotion to the post of B.T. Assistant (Science) was drawn on 01.01.2019.
7.3 Therefore, in the light of the above facts, it has to be seen as to whether, the failure on the part of the appellants to make entry of the first respondent's additional qualification of B.Sc. in the service register will deprive the first respondent from enjoying the benefit of promotion as B.T. Assistant by not including her name in the panel drawn on 01.01.2019?
7.4 The answer to the said question is straightaway ''No''. The panel was drawn in the month of September, 2019. As far as the first respondent is concerned, she has informed about her additional qualification of B.Sc. Chemistry as early as on 27.11.2018. It is not the case of the appellants that the first respondent/writ petitioner has not obtained the degree, nor she is disqualified to become B.T. Assistant. It is admitted by the appellants that the first respondent got qualified to the post, but her name was not included in the panel on the ground that, on the crucial date, she failed to enter the said additional qualification in the service register.
7.5 When such being the case, we are unable to make of anything in the submissions of the appellants, due to the reason that, failure to make entry in the service register with regard to the first respondent's additional qualification was solely on the part of the appellants. It is sheer negligence on the part of the appellants and the same cannot be put against the first respondent/writ petitioner.
7.6 Be that, as it may, it has to be stated that, though as per the guidelines issued by the second appellant, teachers, who were qualified on the crucial date i.e. on 01.01.2019, alone are eligible for inclusion of their names in the panel, however, panel for promotion to the post of B.T. Assistant was issued only in the month of September, 2019 and by that time, the first respondent's additional qualification of B.Sc. Degree was included in the service register, i.e. on 08.08.2019. Therefore, there is no impediment for the appellants to include the first respondent's name in the panel. Since the appellants failed to do so, the first respondent/writ petitioner was constrained to approach the Court, by filing Writ Petition, and the Writ Court having considered all these aspects in a proper perspective, allowed the Writ Petition.
7.7. It would be pertinent to mention here that the mandatory requirement to become eligible for promotion to the post of B.T. Assistant is that the teacher should possess additional qualification on the crucial date, on which, the panel was proposed to be drawn, which requirement, the first respondent has duly complied with. Insofar as the aspect with respect to making entry of the additional qualification in the
service register of the teacher concerned, is concerned, it is only a procedural aspect and any lapse in the procedural aspect can be set right and if the same is set right before the date of preparation of the panel, then, the right of the concerned teacher's name to be included in the panel for promotion as on the crucial date will not be affected.
7.8 In the present case, it is admitted by both the parties that, panel was prepared in the month of September, 2019, and the first respondent's/writ petitioner's qualification of B.Sc. Degree was entered in the service register on 08.08.2019. As stated supra, we are of the view that there is no impediment for the appellants to include the first respondent's name in the panel for promotion as on the crucial date, i.e. 01.01.2019. De-hors the same, we are also of the view that the non-inclusion of the additional qualification of the first respondent, viz., B.Sc. Degree in the service register is owing to sheer negligence on the part of the appellants and the same cannot be put against the first respondent/writ petitioner and thereby, deprive her right to get promotion to the post of B.T. Assistant, by not entering her name in the panel.
7.9 In such view of the matter, we do not find any merit in the Writ Appeal and all the issues raised by the appellants were very well discussed by the Writ Court and we respect and recognize the same.
Sd/Assistant Registrar(CS IV)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
sd
To
Raghunathapuram, Thiruvallangadu Union, Thiruvallangadu, Thiruvallur District-631 204.
+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.44608
W.A. No.559 of 2020
SSV(CO) CT(20/09/2021)
3 issues framed by the court
Whether a teacher's eligibility for a promotion panel drawn on a specific crucial date is affected if their additional qualification was entered in the service register after that date but before the
Whether negligence by the educational authorities in delaying the entry of a qualifying teacher's details in the service register de-prives the teacher of promotion rights.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Single Judge's order allowing the Writ Petition allowing the teacher's name in the promotion panel.
The Chief Educational Officer, Thiruvallur District
The District Educational Officer, Tiruttani Educational District
The Block Educational Officer, Thiruvallangadu Union
D. Mariyammal
The Headmistress of the Panchayat Union Primary School
Pushpa Sathyanarayana
Krishnan Ramasamy
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
