Writ petition filed to quash age restriction notification for teacher recruitment. Court dismissed petition as infructuous following Government Order that raised age limits for direct recruitment.
Writ Petition dismissed as infructuous; connected Miscellaneous Petition also dismissed.
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.
W.P(MD)No.4719 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22.11.2021
CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.VELMURUGAN
W.P(MD)No.4719 of 2021 and W.M.P.(MD) No.3830 of 2021
... Petitioner
Vs.
The Chair Person, Teacher Recruitment Board, 3rd Floor, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned notification / advertisement No.01/2021, dated 11.02.2021 of the respondent and quash the same as unconstitutional and illegal and consequently direct the respondent to issue fresh notification by removing Clause – 5(a) in respect of 5 years age restriction and provide full age relaxation.
For Petitioner : Mr.A.Rajini For Respondent : Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan Standing Counsel
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA,J.)
The Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned notification / advertisement No.01/2021, dated 11.02.2021 of the respondent and quash the same as unconstitutional and illegal and consequently direct the respondent to issue fresh notification by removing Clause – 5(a) in respect of 5 years age restriction and provide full age relaxation.
2.When similar such challenges were made earlier, the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.No.21983 of 2021, dated 08.10.2021, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ (C.Ponnusamy and others v. State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its
1/3
W.P(MD)No.4719 of 2021
Principal Secretary to Government, School Education Department and others) dismissed the Writ Petition, holding that the said Rule is not arbitrary or irrational. The said order was followed by subsequent Division Benches also in various cases. While so, by G.O.Ms.No.144 School Education Department (pa.ka.2(1)) Department, dated 18.10.2021, the age prescribed as per Rule 6(a) of the Special Rules for the Tamil Nadu Elementary Education Subordinate Service, 5 (a) of the Special Rules for the Tamil Nadu School Educational Subordinate Service and Rule 6 of the Special Rules for the Tamil Nadu Higher Secondary Educational Service, for appointment of direct recruitment of teachers was amended and raised from 40 to 45 for General category and 45 to 50 for other categories. It is also made clear stating that the amendment would apply for the notification issued by the Teachers Recruitment Board dated 09.09.2021. The enhancement of the age as mentioned supra is made only for one time and it is applicable till 31.12.2022. As per G.O.Ms.No.91, Human Resources Management (S) Department, dated 13.09.2021, the age limit would be 42 for General category and 47 for other categories from 01.01.2023.
3.The operative portion of G.O.Ms.No.144 School Education (pa.ka.2(1)) Department, dated 18.10.2021, reads as follows:
“5. gs;sp fy;tp Mizahpd; fUj;JUtpid muR Ma;t[ bra;J gpd;tUkhW MizapLfpwJ:-
i.jkpH;ehL bjhlf;ff; fy;tp rhh;epiyg; gzpfSf;fhd rpwg;g[ tpjpfs;, jkpH;ehL gs;spf; fy;tp rhh;epiyg; gzpfSf;fhd rpwg;g[ tpjpfs; kw;Wk; jkpH;ehL Bky;epiyf; fy;tpg; gzpfSf;fhd rpwg;g[ tpjpfs; Mfpatw;wpy; KiwBa taJ tuk;gpw;fhd tpjp vz;.6( a), 5( a) kw;Wk; 6y; eph;zapf;fgl;Ls;sd. Mrphpah; Beuo epakdk; bjhlh;ghf cr;r taJ tuk;gpid bghJg; gphptpdUf;F 40-ypUe;J 45Mft[k;, njug; gphptpdUf;F 45-ypUe;J 50-Mft[k; cah;j;jg;gLfpwJ.
ii. Mrphpah; Bjh;t[ thhpaj;jhy; 09.09.2021 md;W btspaplg;gl;l mwptpf;iff;F ne;j cah;j;jg;gl;l cr;r taJ tuk;g[ bghUe;Jk;.
iii.nt;thW cah;j;jg;gLk; cr;r taJ tuk;gpid 31.12.2022 tiu rpwg;g[ epfH;thf xU Kiw kl;Lk; eph;zapf;fg;gLfpwJ. ne;j cah;j;jg;gl;l cr;r taJ tuk;g[ 31.12.2022 tiu btspaplg;gLk; gs;spf; fy;tpj; Jiwapd; fPH; cs;s Mrphpah; gzp epakdk; bjhlh;ghd mwptpf;iffSf;F bghUe;Jk;.
ivMurhiz (epiy) vz;.91, kdpjts Bkyhzikj; (v!;) Jiw, ehs; 13.09.2021d;go Mrphpah; Beuo epakdj;jpw;fhd cr;r taJ tuk;gpid, 01.01.2023 Kjy; bghJg; gphptpdUf;F 42 Mft[k;, nju gphptpdUf;F 47 Mft[k; eph;zapf;fg;gLfpwJ.”
2/3
W.P(MD)No.4719 of 2021
4.In view of the above Government Order, the challenge made in the Writ Petition has become infructuous. Therefore, the Writ Petition stands dismissed as infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is also dismissed.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CRL SIDE)
// True Copy //
/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)
sj
Note :
In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate / litigant concerned.
W.P(MD)No.4719 of 2021 22.11.2021
sk(CO)
TR(06.12.2021) 3P 1C
3/3
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Writ Petition challenging the age restriction in the teacher recruitment notification infructuous due to subsequent Government Order raising age limit.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
C.Ponnusamy and others v. State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government, School Education Department and othersFollowed¶14
W.P.No.21983 of 2021, dated 08.10.2021
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Petitioner
The Chair Person, Teacher Recruitment Board
PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA
P. Velmurugan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
