J.Kopperuncholan Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining the impugned order passed by the 3^rd respondent in Mu.Mu.No.111056/D1/E4/2010, dated 28.08.2012 and quash the same insofar as relating to granting of approval of petitioner's appointment only from 23.09.2010, as illegal, arbitrary, against rules and service jurisprudence and consequently direct the respondents grant approval to petitioner's appointment from the date of his original appointment on 26.10.2009 as B.T.Assistant Tamil Pandit and further direct the respondents to accord all other attendant and consequential benefits, including arrears of salary, continuity of service etc., from 26.10.2009.

¶24

For Petitioner : Mr.R.Veeramani For Respondents : For R1 to R5 : Mr.S.Prabhakaran Government Advocate

¶25

ORDER

¶26

The Petitioner is before this Court, challenging the Impugned Order dated 28.08.2012 passed by the 3^rd Respondent, the Joint Director of School Education (Secondary Education), College Road, Chennai.

¶27

By the Impugned Order dated 28.08.2012, an appeal of the 6^th

¶28

2/16

¶29

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

¶30

W.P.No.27639 of 2014

¶31

Respondent School to grant approval for appointment of the Petitioner as 'B.T. Assistant Tamil Pandit' in the 6^th Respondent School from the date of appointment was rejected.

¶32

Earlier, the Petitioner was appointed as a 'B.T. Assistant' on 26.10.2009 as Tamil Pandit in the 6^th Respondent School on account of the regular vacancy arose due to the resignation of one M.Sheik Mohammed on 19.07.2009 from the 6^th Respondent School. Therefore, the Petitioner was appointed in the place of M.Sheik Mohammed as a Secondary Grade Teacher as the Petitioner possessed the requisite qualification i.e., B.A in Tamil Literature and B.Ed for the aforesaid post.

¶33

Under these circumstances, the 6^th Respondent School sent relevant documents for approval of the appointment of the Petitioner as B.T. Assistant (Tamil Literature) with effect from 19.07.2009 being the date on which, the previous incumbent M.Sheik Mohammed resigned from the said post from the 6^th Respondent School.

¶34

Earlier, by an Order dated 24.10.2011, the 4^th Respondent granted approval for the appointment of the Petitioner as 'Tamil Pandit' by

¶35

3/16

¶36

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

¶37

W.P.No.27639 of 2014

¶38

upgrading/converting the post of Secondary Grade Teacher with graduate Teacher, namely B.T. Assistant (Tamil Literature). However, the approval for the appointment of the Petitioner to the said post was only with effect from 24.10.2011 instead from the original date of appointment of the Petitioner to the said post i.e., from 19.07.2009.

¶39

The 6^th Respondent School, therefore, filed an appeal before the 3^rd Respondent against the aforesaid order dated 24.10.2011 of the 4^th Respondent. While disposing the appeal by the 6^th Respondent School, the 3^rd Respondent passed the Impugned Order dated 28.08.2012 which reads as under:-

¶40

“j";rht{h; khtl;lk;. gl;Lf;nfhl;il fy;tp khtl;lk;. mjpuk;gl;odk;. fhjh; KifjPd; Mz;fs; nky;epiyg;gs;spapy; 19/07/2009 Kjy; epue;jukhf fhypnaw;gl;l ,ilepiyahrphpah; gzpaplj;jpy; ghh;it 2?y; fhz; murhizg;go. jpU/n$/nfhg;bgU";nrhHd; vd;ghiu 26/10/2009 Kjy; gl;ljhhp (jkpH;) Mrphpauhf nkw;gog; gs;sp eph;thfk; epakdk; bra;Js;sJ/

¶41

j";rht{h; Kjd;ikf; fy;tp mYtyhpd; fojk; K:/K:/vz;/1449-m5-2011 ehs;/24/10/2011?d;go. nkw;go Mrphpahpd; epakd ehs; my;yJ Kjd;ikf; fy;tp mYtyhpd; Miz ehs; ,tw;wpy; vJ gpd;dnuh. me;jehs; Kjy; kl;Lnk ,e;epakdj;jpw;F xg;g[jy; tH';fg;glntz;Lk; vdj; bjhptpj;J ghl khw;wk; bra;J Mizaplg;gl;Ls;sJ/

¶42

vdnt. nkw;go Mrphpahpd; epakd ehshd 26/10/2009 Kjy; epakd xg;g[jy; tH';Fk; tifapy; ghl khw;wk; bra;J MizapLkhW nfhhp ghh;it 6?d; go bjhlh;g[ila gs;spj; jhshsuhy; nky;KiwaPL bra;ag;gl;Ls;sJ/

¶43

nkw;fhz; nky;KiwaPl;L tpz;zg;gk; kw;Wk; ghh;it 5?y;

¶44

4/16

¶45

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

¶46

W.P.No.27639 of 2014

¶47

fhz; gl;Lf;nfhl;il khtl;lf; fy;tp mYtyhpd; mwpf;if Kjypatw;iw ghprPyid bra;jjpy;. ghh;it 2?y; fhz; murhizg;go. ,ilepiyahrphpah; fhypg;gzpaplj;jpy; gl;ljhhp Mrphpaiu epakdk; bra;a bjhlh;g[ila Kjd;ikf; fy;tp mYtyhpd; Kd; mDkjp Miziag; bgwtpy;iy vd;gnjhL mjw;fhf fUj;JUt[k; kpfj; jhkjkhf gs;sp eph;thfj;jhy; mDg;gg;gl;Ls;sJ fz;lwpag;gl;lJ/

¶48

vdpDk; j";rht{h; Kjd;ikf; fy;tp mYtyhpd; fojk; vz;/1449-m5-2011. ehs;/24/10/2011?d;go tH';fg;gl;Ls;s mDkjp Mizfisf; fUj;jpy; bfhz;Lk; mt;thrphpah; epakd ehs; Kjy; bjhlh;e;J gzpahw;wptUtijf; fUj;jpy; bfhz;Lk; epakd xg;g[jy; tH';ff;nfhhp gs;sp eph;thfj;jhy; mDg;gg;gl;l fUj;JU bjhlh;g[ila khtl;lf; fy;tp mYtyfj;jpy; bgwg;gl;l ehshd 23/09/2010 Kjy; gl;ljhhp (jkpH;) Mrphpah; gzpaplkhf cah;j;jp fPH;f;fz;l epge;jidfspd;go Mizaplg;gLfpwJ/

¶49

m) ,g;gzpaplj;ij vjph;fhyj;jpy; vf;fhuzk; bfhz;Lk; kPz;Lk; ghl khw;wk; bra;af; nfhuf;TlhJ/

¶50

M) ,f;fhypg; gzpaplj;jpy; nkw;bfhs;sg;gl;l epakdj;jpw;F Vw;g[ tH';Fk; Kd;dh; eilKiwapy; cs;s murhizfspd; mog;gilapYk;. khzth; vz;zpf;ifapd; mog;gilapYk; ,g;gzpaplk; epug;gj; jFjpahdjh vd;gij bjhlh;g[ila khtl;lf; fy;tp mYtyh; cWjp bra;J bfhs;s ntz;Lk;/

¶51

,) ,g;gzpaplj;ij gjtp cah;tpd; K:yk; epug;gpl jFjpa[ila gzpahsh; ahUk; ,y;iybad;w gs;spj; jhshshpd; cWjpbkhHp bgwg;glntz;Lk;/

¶52

<) nkw;fhz; fhypg;gzpaplk; eilKiwapy; cs;s tpjpfs; kw;Wk; murhizfSf;Fl;gl;L epug;gg;glntz;Lk;/

¶53

c) nkw;go ghl khw;wk; bra;ag;gl;l tptuk; gs;spapd; msitg; gjpntl;oy; gjpt[ bra;ag;glntz;Lk;/”

¶54

As a consequence of the aforesaid order dated 28.08.2012 of the 3^rd

¶55

Respondent, the 5^th Respondent, the District Educational Officer (DEO) modified the appointment of the Petitioner to the post of B.T. Assistant with 5/16

¶56

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

¶57

W.P.No.27639 of 2014

¶58

effect from 23.09.2010 i.e., the alleged date of receipt of the proposal by the 5^th Respondent sent by the 6^th Respondent School regarding the appointment of the Petitioner.

¶59

Aggrieved by the same, the Petitioner filed an appeal before the 2^nd Respondent on 28.01.2014 which was pending. It is stated that immediately after filing the appeal before the 2^nd Respondent, the Petitioner perused the order of this Court rendered on 29.01.2014 in “ S.Anthuvan Christi Raj Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Secretary, Department of School Education, Chennai and others” in W.P.No.17562 of 2012. It is in this background, after waiting for about 9 months, the Petitioner has filed this Writ Petition on 13.10.2014.

¶60

Learned counsel for the Petitioner would submit that the issue is no longer res integra and is squarely covered by the aforesaid decision of the Writ Court in S.Anthuvan Christi Raj's case (cited supra) and also by a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in “Director of School Education and others Vs. Correspondent, St. Joseph's Higher Secondary School” , 2020 SCC OnLine Mad 10069 in W.A.(MD) No.201 of 2020.

¶61

6/16

¶62

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

¶63

W.P.No.27639 of 2014

¶64

Learned Government Advocate for the 1^st to 5^th Respondents on the other hand would submit that there is no merit in the present Writ Petition.

¶65

It is submitted by the learned Government Advocate for the 1^st to 5^th Respondents that without the approval of the 4^th Respondent, the Chief Educational Officer (CEO), the appointment of the Petitioner cannot be sustained and it is contrary to G.O.(Ms) No.144, School Education (D1) Department dated 04.07.2008. Relevant portion of G.O.(Ms) No.144, School Education (D1) Department dated 04.07.2008 is extracted hereunder:-

¶66

“3/ MH;e;j ghprPyidf;Fg; gpd;dh;. nkny gj;jp 3?y; cs;s gs;spf; fy;tp ,af;Fehpd; ghpe;Jiuapid Vw;W. gpd;tUkhW Mizaplg;gLfpd;wJ/

¶67

(i) murhiz (epiy) vz;/244. gs;spf; fy;tp. ehs; 22/09/2007 gj;jp 4(vi)?y; btspaplg;gl;Ls;s Miz muR cjtpg;bgWk; gs;spfSf;Fk; bghUe;Jk

¶68

(ii) muR cjtpbgWk; gs;spfspy; 6?10 tFg;g[fis xnu myfhff; bfhz;L ,ilepiy Mrphpah; gzpapl';fs; epue;jukhf fhypnaw;gLk; nghJ mg;gs;spapd; njit kw;Wk; jFjpapd; mog;gilapy;. njitahd ghlj;jpy; gl;ljhhp Mrphpah; gzpaplkhf khw;wk; bra;jpl rk;ge;jg;gl;l Kjd;ikf; fy;tp mYtyh;f;F mjpfhuk; tH';fg;gLfpd;wJ. kw;Wk;

¶69

(iii) xU Kiw ghlepiy (jkpH;. M';fpyk;. fzpjk;. mwptpay;. rK:f mwptpay;) gl;ljhhp Mrphpah; gzpaplk; Kjd;ikf; fy;tp mYtyuhy; eph;zak; bra;ag;gl;l gpd;dh;. mJ vf;fhuzk; bfhz;Lk; vjph;fhyj;jpy; khw;wg;glf;TlhJ/”

¶70

That apart, the learned Government Advocate for the 1^st to 5^th

¶71

7/16

¶72

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

¶73

W.P.No.27639 of 2014

¶74

Respondents would submit that the 6^th Respondent School sent a proposal to the 5^th Respondent, the District Educational Officer (DEO) for conversion of the post of 'Secondary Grade Teacher' to the post of 'B.T.Assistant' only on 28.07.2011 and therefore on this count also there cannot be any retrospective approval to the appointment of the Petitioner to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher with effect from 26.10.2009 i.e., from the date of appointment of the Petitioner by the 6^th Respondent School.

¶75

I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Government Advocate for the 1^st to 5^th Respondents.

¶76

There is no dispute that the Petitioner possesses requisite qualification

¶77

to be appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher at the 6^th Respondent School i.e., B.A in Tamil Literature and B.Ed.

¶78

The appointment of the Petitioner as 'B.T. Assistant' to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher at the 6^th Respondent School is in consonance with Section 19 of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973 read with Rule 15(4) of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools

¶79

8/16

¶80

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

¶81

W.P.No.27639 of 2014

¶82

(Regulation) Rules, 1974. (hereinafter referred to as the '1974 Rules'.)

¶83

In terms of Rule 15(3) of the 1974 Rules, in case of a 'regular vacancy', a fully qualified candidate shall be appointed only on a regular basis. Similarly, in case of a 'temporary vacancy', i.e., leave vacancy, deputation for training or suspension of the Teacher's Certificate, a 'Teacher' or 'Other Person' may be appointed for a specified period and the School is required to

¶84

regularize/execute an Agreement in Form VII-B to the 1974 Rules.

¶85

Insofar as Qualifications, conditions of service of teachers and other persons, are concerned, it is expressly provided in Rule 15(4) of the 1974 Rules. Rule 15(4) of the 1974 Rules as it stood during the period in dispute is

¶86

reproduced below for the purpose of clarity:-

¶87

“ 15 . Qualifications, conditions of service of teachers and other persons. –

¶88

(1).....

¶89

(2).....

¶90

(3).....

¶91

(4)(i) Promotion shall be made on grounds of merit and ability, seniority being considered only when merit and ability are approximately equal. (ii) Appointments to the various categories of teachers shall be made by the following methods:-

¶92

i. Promotion among the qualified teachers in that school.

¶93

ii. If no qualified and suitable candidate is

¶94

9/16

¶95

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

¶96

W.P.No.27639 of 2014

¶97

available by method (i) above, -

¶98

(a) Appointment of other persons employed in that school, provided they are fully qualified to hold the post of teachers.

¶99

(b)Appointment of teachers from any other school.

¶100

(c) Direct recruitment.

¶101

In the case of appointment from any other school or by direct recruitment the School Committee shall obtain the prior permission of the District Educational Officer in respect of Pre-primary, Primary and Middle School and that of the Chief Educational Officer in respect of High Schools and Higher Secondary Schools, Teacher Training Institutions setting out the reasons for such appointment. In respect of corporate body running more than one school, the schools under that body shall be treated as one unit for purpose of this rule.

¶102

(d) Appointment to the post of Headmaster of Higher Secondary School shall be made by the method specified in clause (ii) either from the category of Headmasters of High Schools or Teachers' Training Institutes or from the category of Post-Graduate Assistants in academic subjects or Post-Graduate Assistants in Languages provided they possess the prescribed qualifications.

¶103

(4-A) Any person employed in the institution specified in column (1) of the Table below, aggrieved by an order issued under sub-rule (4) may prefer an appeal to the authority specified in the corresponding entry in column (2) thereof:-

¶104

Institution	Authority
(1)	(2)
Pre-primary, Primary or Middle Schools	Chief Educational Officer
High School or Higher	Joint Director of School
Secondary School (in respect of a person other	Education (Secondary Education)
than Headmaster)Post-

¶105

10/16

¶106

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

¶107

W.P.No.27639 of 2014

¶108

Institution	Authority
Graduate Assistant (both Academic and Languages) or Physical Director
Teachers' Training Institutes	Deputy Director (Teacher Education)
Higher Secondary School in respect of Headmaster	Joint Director of School Education (Higher
Post-Graduate Assistant	Secondary)
(both Academic and Languages) or Physical Director

¶109

Insofar as appointment to the post of 'Teachers' are concerned, it is

¶110

under Rule 15(4)(ii) of the 1974 Rules. As per Rule 15(4)(ii) of the 1974 Rules, appointment to various categories of 'Teachers' shall be made by the following

¶111

methods:-

¶112

i. Promotion among the qualified teachers in that school.

¶113

ii. If no qualified and suitable candidate is available by method (i) above, -

¶114

(a) Appointment of other persons employed in that school, provided they are fully qualified to hold the post of teachers. (b) Appointment of teachers from any other school. (c) Direct recruitment.

¶115

In the case of appointment from any other school or by direct recruitment the School Committee shall obtain the prior permission of the District Educational Officer in respect of Pre-primary, Primary and Middle School and that of the Chief Educational Officer in respect of High Schools and Higher Secondary Schools, Teacher Training Institutions setting out the reasons for such appointment. In respect of corporate body running more than one

¶116

11/16

¶117

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

¶118

W.P.No.27639 of 2014

¶119

school, the schools under that body shall be treated as one unit for purpose of this rule.

¶120

Only if no qualified and suitable candidate is available as prescribed in Rule 15(4)(ii)(i) of the 1974 Rules, then appointment of 'Other Persons' employed in the School, provided they are fully qualified to hold the post of 'Teachers' are to be considered by following the Rule 15(4)(ii)(ii)(a) of the 1974 Rules.

¶121

If the circumstances specified in Rule 15(4)(ii)(ii)(b) and (c) of the 1974 Rules is to be followed, permission of the District Educational Officer (DEO) in respect of Pre-primary, Primary and Middle School and that of the Chief Educational Officer (CEO) in respect of High Schools and the Higher Secondary Schools, Teacher Training Institutions has to be obtained.

¶122

Dealing with an identical situation, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this

¶123

Court in Director of School Education and others ( cited supra ), has held as

¶124

under:-

¶125

“16. It is also a well settled position of law that once an appointment made to the sanctioned post, prior approval is not necessary and admittedly, the accommodation/appointment of R.Mercy as Tamil Pandit, is to the sanctioned post. The other issue as to the date of approval of appointment is no longer res integra in the light of the following judgments:

¶126

12/16

¶127

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

¶128

W.P.No.27639 of 2014

¶129

(i) The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai - 6 and others v. S.Vanitha and others [W.A.(MD)Nos.828 of 2014 and 129 to 132 of 2015, decided on 22.04.2016] , wherein at paragraph 11, it is observed as follows:

¶130

“11. In view of the above consistent decisions of this Court on the issue, we are of the view that the issue is no more res integra. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the 1st respondents/teachers, approval has to be granted only from the date of appointment and not from a later date, namely, from the date on which permission for post conversion was granted.”

¶131

(ii)In The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep., by the Secretary to Government, Department of School Education, Fort St. George, Madras - 600 009 and others v. J.Remila and another reported in 2018 (1) WLR 410 [W.A(MD)No.1350 of 2017, decided on 14.11.2017] , the Division Bench while answering the question as to the lack of prior permission for conversion of post and the appointment made by the institution without getting such permission, held that “the impugned proceedings which is the subject matter of challenge in the writ petition, interfered with an overall administrative control of the minority institution over its staff and abridges/dilutes their right to establish and administer their educational institution and upheld the order passed by the learned Single Judge in allowing the writ petition.”

¶132

(iii) In C.Wilson Sundar Raj v. Director of School Education, Chennai - 600 006 and others reported in (2012) 3 MLJ 678 , a Single Bench of this Court following the decision in M.Sivakumar v. The Government of Tamil Nadu, rep., by its

¶133

13/16

¶134

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

¶135

W.P.No.27639 of 2014

¶136

Secretary, Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai reported in LNIND 2004 Mad 1098 : 2005 Writ L.R., 515 as well as other unreported orders, found that once the first respondent, namely, the Director of School Education, granted permission to convert the post from P.G.Assistant (Tamil) into P.G. Assistant (English) at the fourth respondent school, such permission should take effect from the date of appointment of the petitioner, especially, when the request for conversion of the post was made by the school based on the appointment of the petitioner on 19.01.1999.”

¶137

In view of the above, there are no merits in the submissions of the learned Government Advocate for the 1^st to 5^th Respondents.

¶138

Therefore, this Writ Petition deserves to be allowed and is accordingly allowed. The Impugned Order dated 28.08.2012 passed by the 3^rd Respondent is hereby quashed. The Official Respondents are directed to grant approval to the Petitioner's appointment from the date of his original appointment on 26.10.2009 as 'B.T.Assistant Tamil Pandit' and also accord all other attendant and consequential benefits thereof. The said exercise shall be carried out by the Official Respondents within a period of two months from the date of a receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

¶139

14/16

¶140

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

¶141

W.P.No.27639 of 2014

¶142

17.03.2025

¶143

Neutral Citation : Yes / No

¶144

arb