The single judge dismissed writ petitions seeking appointment as B.T Assistant (Tamil) without TET qualification, holding that the issue is covered by a Division Bench decision which mandates TET for appointment and promotion to this post while allowing continuance in service for prior appointments without it.
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.Nos.14946 & 14947 of 2018
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 20.03.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND
W.P.Nos.14946 & 14947 of 2018 and
WMP.Nos.17682, 17683, 17685 & 17686 of 2018
K.Subbarayan ...Petitioner in W.P.No.14946 of 2018
M.Selvam ...Petitioner in W.P.No.14947 of 2018
Vs.
...Respondents in both W.P's.
Common Prayer: Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 2nd respondent herein in relation to the impugned order passed in Na.Ka.No.12128/C2/E1/2016 dated 08.03.2018, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to appoint the petitioners in the post of
1/7
W.P.Nos.14946 & 14947 of 2018
B.T Assistant (Tamil) within the 2% set apart for the non-teaching staff of the education department vide G.O.Ms.No.175 (School Education Department) dated 19.07.2007 by including the name of the petitioners in the panel for the year 2015-16, without insisting upon TET qualification within the time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble Court.
In both W.P's.:
For Petitioner : Ms.Dakshayani Reddy, SC
For Respondents : Mr.M.Alagu Goutham, GA, for R1-R3
COMMON ORDER
Since the issue involved in both the Writ petitions are similar in nature, they are disposed of by way of this common order.
W.P.Nos.14946 & 14947 of 2018
2015-16, without insisting upon TET qualification.
batch of cases dated 02.06.2023, in similar circumstances, has passed orders and the relevant portion of the same is quoted hereunder :-
(a) Any teacher appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher or Graduate Teacher/BT Assistant prior to 29.07.2011 shall continue in service and also receive increments and incentives, even if they do not possess/acquire a pass in TET. At the same time, for future promotional prospects like promotion from secondary grade teacher to B.T. Assistant as well as for promotion to Headmasters, etc.,
3/7
W.P.Nos.14946 & 14947 of 2018
irrespective of their dates of original appointment, they must necessarily possess TET, failing which they will not be eligible for promotion.
(b) Any appointment made to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher after 29.07.2011 must necessarily possess TET.
(c) Any appointment made to Graduate Teacher/BT Assistant, after 29.07.2011, whether by direct recruitment or promotion from the post of Secondary Grade Teacher, or transfer, must necessarily possess TET. *The principles laid down in this judgment will not have application to minority schools, both aided and unaided as explained in paragraph no.71.1.
(d) The Special Rules for the Tamil Nadu School Educational Subordinate Service issued in GO (Ms.) No.13 School Education (S.E3(1)) Department dated 30.01.2020 insofar as it prescribes “a pass in Teacher Eligibility Test (TET)” only for direct recruitment for the post of BT Assistant and not for promotion thereto in Annexure-I (referred to in Rule 6) is struck down, thereby meaning that TET is mandatory/essential eligibility criterion for appointment to the post of BT Assistant even by promotion from Secondary Grade Teachers.
(e) The language employed in G.O. (Ms) No. 181 dated 15.11.2011 is to be read and understood to the effect that for continuance in service without promotional prospects, TET is not mandatory.
4/7
W.P.Nos.14946 & 14947 of 2018
indicate that the teachers have not been appointed for the last ten years inspite of being qualified with a pass in TET. On the basis of the above findings and observations made, the State Government is directed to conduct TET periodically and make direct recruitment of teachers and promotion from among TET qualified candidates at the earliest."
20.03.2024
skt
Index : Yes/No NCC : Yes/No Speaking order : Yes/No
5/7
W.P.Nos.14946 & 14947 of 2018
To
6/7
W.P.Nos.14946 & 14947 of 2018
BATTU DEVANAND, J.
skt
W.P.Nos.14946 & 14947 of 2018 and WMP.Nos.17682, 17683, 17685 & 17686 of 2018
20.03.2024
7/7
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioners are entitled to appointment as B.T Assistant (Tamil) without insisting upon TET qualification within the 2% reserved quota for non-teaching staff.
Whether the impugned order quashing the petitioners' inclusion in the panel for the year 2015-16 is valid in light of the Division Bench's decision on TET eligibility.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
W.A.Nos.313 of 2022 and etc., batch of cases dated 02.06.2023Followed¶29
1 provisions across 1 enactments
K.Subbarayan
M.Selvam
The State of Tamil Nadu
The Director of School Education
The Chief Educational Officer, Thiruvannamalai
Battu Devanand
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
