P.Nehru Vs the Government of Tamil Nadu

Prayer:- Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of Mandamus directing the 6th respondent school to act upon the letter having reference O.Mu. En.2214/ AA3/ 2024 dated 16.04.2024 sent by the 4th respondent to the 6th respondent school in response to the petitioners representations dated 15.03.2024 and 10.04.2024 for appointment of the petitioner to the post of Physical Director- grade - I in the 6th respondent school in the existing vacancy , within a time period to be stipulated by this Honble court.

¶22

For Petitioner(s): Mr.R.Eswaran

¶23

For Respondent(s): Ms.Mythreye Chandru, SGP for R1 to R5 Mr. S. Nedunchezhiyan for R6

¶24

ORDER

¶25

This Writ Petition has been filed for the following reliefs:-

¶26

“directing the 6th respondent school to act upon the letter having

¶27

reference O.Mu. En.2214/ AA3/ 2024 dated 16.04.2024 sent by the 4th respondent to the 6th respondent school in response to the petitioner’s representations dated 15.03.2024 and 10.04.2024 for appointment of the petitioner to the post of Physical Director- grade - I in the 6th respondent

¶28

Page2 of 6

¶29

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

¶30

WP No. 23960 of 2025

¶31

school in the existing vacancy , within a time period to be stipulated by this Honble court.

¶32

The petitioner’s case is that he was appointed as a Physical Education Teacher in Avichi Higher Secondary School, Virugambakkam, Chennai, in the year 1999. Thereafter, he was promoted as s B.T. Assistant (Science) in the said school on 02.06.2005. Though the petitioner was eligible to be considered for appointment as Physical Director Grade-I in the 6th respondent school, as one Mr. Subramani was employed as Physical Director Grade-I in the said school from 2001 to 31.05.2024, the petitioner could not claim appointment to the said post despite possessing an M.P.Ed. qualification.The said Mr.Subramani had retired on 31.05.2024 after attaining the age of 60 years.

¶33

On 15.03.2025, the petitioner had sent a representation to the 6^th respondent school with a copy to the respondents 4 and 5 stating that since he had the M.P.Ed qualification and having the experience of serving as Physical Education Teacher in the previous school, he is fully eligible to be considered for the post of Physical Director Grade - I in the 6th respondent school upon the retirement of the said Mr.Subramani on 31.05.2024. As his representation has not been considered, the petitioner had once again sent a representation dated

¶34

Page3 of 6

¶35

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

¶36

WP No. 23960 of 2025

¶37

10.04.2024 to the 6^th respondent school. In response to the petitioner’s representations, the 4^th respondent by their letter dated 16.04.2024 directed the 6^th respondent school to consider the representation of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Physical Director Gr.-I.

¶38

The petitioner would submit that even after receipt of the letter dated 16.04.2024 from the 4^th respondent directing the 6^th respondent to consider the petitioner’s representation, the 6^th respondent had failed to consider the same. Hence, the present writ petition.

¶39

Heard the learned counsel on either side.

¶40

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the 6^th respondent

¶41

is directed to consider and pass orders on the petitioner’s representations dated 15.03.2024 and 10.04.2024 seeking appointment to the post of Physical Director

¶42

Grade I in the existing vacancy within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the petitioner is found suitable, the 6^th respondent shall send the necessary proposal to the 4^th respondent and the 4^th respondent shall pass appropriate orders within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of such proposal.

¶43

Page4 of 6

¶44

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

¶45

WP No. 23960 of 2025

¶46

Index: Yes/No

¶47