The Commissioner Vs Shri G.K.Jain Higher Secondary School — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

The Commissioner Vs Shri G.K.Jain Higher Secondary School — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ Appeal disposed of accordingly with no costs and the connected miscellaneous petition (C.M.P.No.5940 of 2022) closed; no interference with the writ court's order dated 05.10.2021 in W.P.No.21430 of 2021, but the appellants directed to pass appropriate orders granting approval to the appointment of Mr.Shiv Kumar Shukla as B.T. Assistant from 04.04.2019 within four (4) weeks of receipt of a copy of this order, subject to the Hon'ble Supreme Court's final decisions in Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v. Union of India.

Issue for consideration

Whether rejection of approval of the appointment of B.T. Assistant Mr.Shiv Kumar Shukla in the respondent minority aided school, solely on the ground of non-qualification in TET, is justified, when the Government has never conducted TET for Hindi specialised teachers. +1 more

Court's answer

Factual finding: in the instant case, the Government has never conducted TET for Hindi specialised teachers.

Ratio / Principle

Rejecting the application seeking approval of the appointment as B.T. Assistant on the ground of non-qualification in TET is unjustifiable when the Government itself has not conducted TET for Hindi, more particularly when it is a post sanctioned by the Educational Authorities themselves.

Key takeaways

Any such approval shall be subject to the final decisions to be taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v. Union of India.ratio¶31
In the light of the aforesaid observations and findings, no interference is required to the order passed by the writ court.ratio¶35
Direction to the appellants to pass appropriate orders granting approval to the appointment of Mr.Shiv Kumar Shukla, B.T. Assistant in the respondent's school, from the date of his original appointment i.e. 04.04.2019.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.A.No.887 of 2022 (with C.M.P.No.5940 of 2022), High Court of Judicature at Madras, decided 23.09.2025 by M.S. Ramesh and R. Sakthivel, JJ. Education authorities (Commissioner/Directorate of School Education, Chief Educational Officer and District Educational Officer, Chennai) appealed under Clause 15 of the Letter Patent against the writ court's order dated 05.10.2021 in W.P.No.21430 of 2021, concerning refusal of approval to the appointment of B.T. Assistant Mr.Shiv Kumar Shukla in Shree G.K.Jain Higher Secondary School, a minority aided school, the rejection having been made only because he did not qualify in the Tamil Nadu Teacher Eligibility Test (TET). The Court noted the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision dated 01.09.2025 in Civil Appeal No.1385 of 2025 that RTE Act compliance applies to all schools except those established and administered by minorities (religious or linguistic) until the reference in Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v. Union of India (W.P.(C) No.416 of 2012) is decided, and observed that the Government has never conducted TET for Hindi specialised teachers (TET also not conducted for Urdu and Sanskrit specialised teachers). Holding the rejection unjustifiable — particularly as the post was sanctioned by the Educational Authorities themselves — the Court left the writ court's order undisturbed and directed the appellants to grant approval from the appointee's original appointment date (04.04.2019) within four weeks, subject to the Supreme Court's final decisions in Pramati. Appeal disposed of; no costs; connected petition closed.

W.A.No.887 of 2022

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 23.09.2025

CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMESH

and

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SAKTHIVEL

W.A.No.887 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.5940 of 2022

1.The Commissioner Directorate of School Education DPI Campus, College Road Chennai 600 006

2.The Chief Educational Officer Chennai

3.The District Educational Officer Office of the District Education Office Chennai East Chennai 600 005 ... Petitioners

Vs.

Shree G.K.Jain Higher Secondary School Represented by its Correspondent 15, 180 M.S.Koil St Pudumanaikuppam Royapuram, Chennai Tamil Nadu 600 013

... Respondents

Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letter Patent, praying to set

Page 1 of 4

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

W.A.No.887 of 2022

aside the order dated 05.10.2021 made in W.P.No.21430 of 2021 and allow the Writ Appeal.

F or Appellants : Mr.Neethiperumal Government Advocate For Respondent : Mr.Dakshayani Reddy Senior Counsel for Ms.Sunitha

JUDGMENT

M.S.RAMESH, J. and

R.SAKTHIVEL, J.

The respondent, seeking approval of the appointment of the B.T.

Assistant viz. Mr.Shiv Kumar Shukla, was rejected by the appellants only on the ground that he did not qualify himself in the Tamil Nadu Teacher Eligibility Test (TET).

2.The respondent herein is the minority aided school. In a recent decision by the Hon'ble Supreme Court dated 01.09.2025 in Civil Appeal No.1385 of 2025, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that the provisions of the RTE Act requires to be complied with all schools except the schools established and administered by the minority, whether religious or linguistic, till such time the reference in Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v. Union of India (W.P.(C) No.416 of 2012) is decided by

Page 2 of 4

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

W.A.No.887 of 2022

the Hon'ble Supreme Court. However, in the instant case, the Government has never conducted TET for Hindi specialised teachers. Incidently, TET has also not been conducted for Urdu and Sanskrit specialised teachers. According to the learned Government Advocate appearing for the appellants, a proposal is pending before the Government in this regard for conducting TET for these languages.

3.When the Government itself has not conducted TET for Hindi, rejecting the application seeking for approval of the appointment as a B.T.Assistant, on the ground of non qualification in TET, will be unjustifiable, more particularly, when it is a post sanctioned by the Educational Authorities themselves. However, such approval shall be subject to the final decisions to be taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust v. Union of India.

In the light of the aforesaid observations and findings, no

M.S.RAMESH, J. and R.SAKTHIVEL, J. kas

interference is required to the order passed by the writ court. Accordingly

Page 3 of 4

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

W.A.No.887 of 2022

there shall a direction to the appellants to pass appropriate orders, granting approval to the appointment of Mr.Shiv Kumar Shukla, B.T. Assistant in the respondent's school from the date of his original appointment i.e. 04.04.2019. Such order shall be passed atleast within a

period of four (4) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5.The Writ Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No costs.

Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

kas

Index: Yes / No Neutral Citation Speaking / Non Speaking

W.A.No.887 of 2022 and C.M.P.No.5940 of 2022

Page 4 of 4

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