Back
2006 Supreme(Mad) 2419
High Court of Judicature at Madras
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. JYOTHIMANI
K. Indirani & Others - Appellant
Versus
The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.By Secretary to Government & Others - Respondents
W.P.Nos.25227 of 2006, 30741 of 2006 & 31380 of 2006
Decided On : 14 September 2006
The weightage marks for candidates with Employment Exchange enrollment and teaching experience must be added immediately after the merit list is prepared and during certificate verification, not afterward, to ensure that the weightage marks are given to all eligible candidates and not just those who are selected after the certificate verification.
Headnote:
The Court held that the written examination for the selection of teachers was not arbitrary or illegal. However, the weightage marks for candidates with Employment Exchange enrollment and teaching experience must be added immediately after the merit list is prepared and during certificate verification, not afterward. The communal roster system must be followed serially, not by taking the total number of candidates for each group.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, who had completed their Post Graduate degrees and registered with the Employment Exchange, challenged the notification issued by the Teachers Recruitment Board for the direct recruitment of Post Graduate Assistant / Physical Education Directors Grade I in Government Higher Secondary Schools. The notification prescribed a written examination for selection, which the petitioners argued was discriminatory against candidates like them who had completed their qualifications earlier and were waiting for appointment through the Employment Exchange.
Finding of the Court:
The Court found that the written examination was not arbitrary or illegal as it was the most fool-proof method to ensure quality in the selection process. However, the Court held that the weightage marks for candidates with Employment Exchange enrollment and teaching experience must be added immediately after the merit list is prepared and during certificate verification, not afterward. This would ensure that the weightage marks are given to all eligible candidates and not just those who are selected after the certificate verification.
Issues: 1. Whether the written examination for the selection of teachers was arbitrary or illegal. 2. Whether the weightage marks for candidates with Employment Exchange enrollment and teaching experience should be added immediately after the merit list is prepared and during certificate verification, or afterward. 3. Whether the communal roster system should be followed serially or by taking the total number of candidates for each group.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The written examination was not arbitrary or illegal as it was the most fool-proof method to ensure quality in the selection process. 2. The weightage marks for candidates with Employment Exchange enrollment and teaching experience must be added immediately after the merit list is prepared and during certificate verification, not afterward, to ensure that the weightage marks are given to all eligible candidates and not just those who are selected after the certificate verification. 3. The communal roster system must be followed serially, not by taking the total number of candidates for each group, to ensure that all communities are represented in the selection process.
Final Decision: The Court disposed of the writ petitions, holding that the written examination was not arbitrary or illegal, but the weightage marks must be added immediately after the merit list is prepared and during certificate verification. The Court also directed the respondents to follow the communal roster system serially.
(PRAYER IN W.P.No.25227 of 2006: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records comprised in Notification in Advt.No.1/2006-07 issued by the Third respondent dated 26.07.2006 and to quash the Clause 8 and 10 of the said notification requiring to undergo written examination for making appointment to the post of Teacher at School level and consequently direct the respondents to dispense with the method of holding written examination for filling up the post of Teacher at School level in future.
PRAYER IN W.P.No.30741 of 2006: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records comprised in Notification in Advt.No.1/2006-07 issued by the Third respondent dated 26.07.2006 and to quash the Clause 8 and 10 of the said notification requiring to appear the petitioner for written examination for the post of the school teachers and consequently direct the respondent to dispense with the method of holding the written examination for filling up the school teachers post.
PRAYER IN W.P.No.31380 of 2006: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for records comprised in Notification in Advt.No.1/2006-07 issued by the Third respondent dated 26.07.2006 and to quash the Clause 8 and 10 of the said notification requiring to undergo written examination for making appointment to the post of Teacher at School level and consequently direct the respondents to dispense with the method of holding written examination for filling up the post of Teacher at School level in future.)
All these writ petitions are filed challenging the notification dated 26.07.2006 issued by the third respondent namely the Teacher Recruitment Board, Channai, in respect of Clause 8 and 10 of the said impugned notification requiring the candidates to undergo written examination for making appointment to the post of teachers at school level and also for a consequential direction against the respondents to dispense with the method of holding written examination for filling up of vacancies for the post of teachers at school level in future.
2. The petitioners have acquired Post Graduate degree in various subjects like Botany, Zoology, etc., and they have registered with the Employment Exchange. In respect of the petitioner in W.P.No.25227 of 2006, the registration was on 30.07.1985, the petitioner in W.P.No.30741 of 2006, the registration was on 03.05.1991 and the petitioner in W.P.No.31380 of 2006, the registration was on 15.06.1983 and which has been periodically renewed till date. Apart from the said Post Graduate degree, the petitioners have obtained B.Ed., degree and also M.Ed., in respect of the petitioner in W.P.No.25227 of 2006 and W.P.No.31380 of 2006 and they are all qualified for appointment as Post Graduate Assistants at school level and they have worked in some of the private educational institutions on a consolidated pay.
3. According to the petitioners, whenever vacancies for the post of teachers in schools as well as the Lecturers in colleges arose the usual method was that the said vacancies were filled up among the candidates who have registered their names in the Professional and Executive Employment Exchange Office, based on which call letters will be issued on the seniority basis in employment registration and it was the legitimate expectation that the petitioners would get appointment on seniority basis through the Employment Exchange Office. The petitioners have also informed about their higher qualifications of M.Phil, M.Ed., etc. to the Employment Exchange. The normal method is that the Employment Exchange used to send candidates on the basis of seniority in the registration in the Employment Exchange at the rate of 1:3 ratio to the appointing authorities. It was from 2001, the Government has intro
