- Court
- High Court of Madras
- Decided
- 14 December 2023
- Bench
- R.Vijayakumar
- Case no.
- WP(MD) 20655/2023
Judgment
O R D E R The present writ petition has been filed by a Physical Education Teacher challenging the order passed by the first respondent herein, wherein, his appointment has not been approved.
¶2The petitioner has been appointed as a Physical Education Teacher in the vacancy arising out of promotion on 01.07.2019. When the proposal was forwarded by the School Management, the same was rejected relying upon the interim order passed by this Court in W.A.(MD) No. 76 of 2019, etc., batch, dated 09.04.2019 and G.O.(Ms) No.165, School Education Department, dated 17.09.2019. The said order is under challenge in the present writ petition.
¶3According to the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, as per G.O.(Ms) No.165, School Education Department, dated 17.09.2019, there are no surplus teachers in the Minority Stand alone School. He further relied upon the staff fixation order for the academic year 2019 – 2020 to contend that one post of Physical Education Teacher is available for being filled up by the Management.
¶4However, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents had contended that if there are surplus teachers in the other Management or within the Institution, they have to be taken into consideration before granting approval to the Management. Hence, he prayed for sustaining the order passed by the authority.
¶5Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 and 2.
¶6The petitioner has been appointed as a Physical Education Teacher on 01.07.2019. Admittedly, the petitioner's School is a Minority Stand alone School. A perusal of the staff fixation order for the academic year 2019 – 2020 indicates that there is a sanctioned vacancy (without being deployed as surplus) for the post of Physical Education Teacher. Therefore, there cannot be any impediment for the said Management to fill up the said post. The authorities have erroneously relied upon G.O.(Ms) No.165, dated 17.09.2019 and the interim order, dated 09.04.2019 in W.A(MD) No. 76 of 2019.
¶7In view of the above said facts, the order impugned in the writ petition is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the file of the first respondent. The first respondent herein is directed to pass orders approving the appointment of the writ petitioner as Physical Education Teacher with effect from 01.07.2019 with all attendant benefits. The said exercise shall be completed within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
¶8With the above said observations, this Writ Petition stands allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition stands closed.
14.12.2023 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No ebsi To
¶1The Chief Educational Officer Madurai District.
¶2The District Educational Officer, (Secondary) Melur, Madurai District. R.VIJAYAKUMAR,J. ebsi W.P(MD)No.20655 of 2023
14.12.2023
Case details
Parties and counsel
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 14.12.2023 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR W.P(MD)No.20655 of 2023 and W.M.P(MD) No.17084 of 2023 S.Mansuralihan ... Petitioner Vs. 1. The Chief Educational Officer Madurai District. 2. The District Educational Officer, (Secondary) Melur, Madurai District. 3. The Correspondent, Al Ameen Higher Secondary School, K.Pudur, Madurai District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the first respondent in his proceedings in O.Mu.No.7965/A4/2020, dated 24.12.2020 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Physical Education Teacher with effect from 01.07.2019 with salary and all consequential benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Panneer Selvam For Respondents : Mr.V.Om Prakash Government Advocate for R1 and R2 : No appearance – for R3
Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.