Dismissed

The Chief Educational Officer v. Central Higher Secondary School

Madras HC1 Oct 2024WA(MD)/1772/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court dismissed a writ appeal challenging a decision not to appoint a teacher in a minority school. The court held that minority institutions can appoint teachers irrespective of dust-surface qualification pending Supreme Court pronouncement, thus dismissing the appeal. The imported order allowing the writ petition was upheld.

What did the court decide?

None. The writ appeal and connected miscellaneous petition were dismissed.

The Chief Educational Officer Vs Central Higher… — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.A(MD)No.1772 of 2024

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 01.10.2024

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

¶6

W.A(MD)No.1772 of 2024 and C.M.P(MD)No.13544 of 2024

¶7

The Chief Educational Officer, Tuticorin District, Tuticorin-628 002. 2. The District Educational Officer, Tuticorin-628 215, Tuticorin District. ... Appellants

¶8

vs.

¶9

Central Higher Secondary School, Kayalpatnam-628 204, Tuticorin District, Represented by its Correspondent. 2. Benazir ... Respondents

¶10

Prayer : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order dated 15.12.2023 in W.P(MD)No.29620 of 2023.

¶11

For Appellants : Mr.S.P.Maharajan, Special Government Pleader For R1 : Mr.M.Jerin Mathew For R2 : Mr.B.Subash

¶12

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶13

Page No.1 of 4

¶14

W.A(MD)No.1772 of 2024

¶15

JUDGMENT

¶16

( Judgement of the Court was made by R.SUBRAMANIAN, J.)

¶17

Admittedly, the 1^st respondent / writ petitioner is a stand alone minority institution. It sought for approval of the appointment of the 2^nd respondent as B.T. Assistant in Mathematics in a sanctioned vacancy. The approval was rejected on the ground that there are surplus teachers in the district and that the 2^nd respondent did not possess TET qualification. The Writ Court has allowed the writ petition on the ground that being a stand alone minority institution, the question of surplus will not arise unless it is shown that there was surplus teacher in that very institution. As regards the TET qualification, the learned Single Judge held that the same is not required for teachers appointed in minority institutions as held by this Court in several other earlier judgments.

¶18

Though Mr.S.P.Maharajan, learned Special Government Pleader

¶19

would vehemently contend that the question relating to applicability of TET qualification is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, we do not think we can wait for the Supreme Court to pronounce on the issue, since minority institution can appoint even persons without TET qualification as teachers.

¶20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

Page No.2 of 4

¶22

W.A(MD)No.1772 of 2024

¶23

Hence, the Writ Appeal fails and it is accordingly dismissed. No

¶24

costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶25

(R.S.M, J.) (L.V.G, J.) 01.10.2024

¶26

Index : Yes / No Neutral Citation : Yes / No bala

¶27

¶28

The Chief Educational Officer, Tuticorin District, Tuticorin-628 002.

¶29

The District Educational Officer, Tuticorin-628 215, Tuticorin District.

¶30

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶31

Page No.3 of 4

¶32

W.A(MD)No.1772 of 2024

¶33

R.SUBRAMANIAN, J. and L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

¶34

bala

¶35

JUDGMENT MADE IN W.A(MD)No.1772 of 2024 DATED : 01.10.2024

¶36

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page No.4 of 4

The Chief Educational Officer v. Central Higher Secondary School

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Chief Educational Officer v. Central Higher Secondary School

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

B.Stepha Sharon Vs The District Educational Officer

Dhanabalan.G Vs The Additional Secretary to Government

The Managing Director Vs Amirthavalli

The Managing Director Vs v.Kalimuthan

The Registrar Judicial Vs The Joint Commissioner

Kumar Vs The District Collector