Selection of candidates for appointment must be done as per the norms prescribed by the Act and Rules.

Elipe Dharma Rao, J.

The appellant herein was appointed as Physical Education Teacher in the 6th respondent School on 6. 1994. The 6th respondent School is functioning as a Non-minority aided Educational institution, getting grants from the State under the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Grant-in-aid code of the Educational Department and the School is covered by the rules and regulations of Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973 and the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Rules 1974.

2. It is seen from the records that one V.Chokkalai was working as Physical Director Grade-II and he retired on attaining the age of superannuation on the A.N. of 30.9.1999, but was re-employed from 10. 1999 to 35. 2000. In the meanwhile, pursuant to the repeated requests of the said V.Chokkalai and as per G.O.(4D) No.1, School Education Department, dated 21. 2000, the Director of School Education had passed orders in his proceedings R.C.No.2431/W7/W12/97, dated 23. 2000 upgrading the post of Physical Director Grade-II held by the said V.Chokkalai to that of Physical Director Grade-I, subject to the condition that the Teacher whose post has been upgraded should possess the requisite qualifications to the post of Physical Director Grade-I and the School should have a strength of not less than 400 pupils from Standards 9 to 12.

3. It is the case of the upgrading authority i.e. the educational authorities that at the time of upgrading the post, the incumbent viz. V.Chokkalai was working on re-employment terms from 10. 1999 to 35. 2000 and hence the upgradation of Physical Director Grade-II into Grade-I was not effected and not utilised since the incumbent retired on 30.9.1999 on attaining the age of superannuation and hence the post continued as Physical Director Grade-II, in which capacity alone the said Chokkalai retired. It is also seen that the Director of School Education, in his proceedings Rc.No.2431/W7/97-1, dated 20.4.2002 withdrew the order of upgradation for the reason that the said incumbent Mr.Chokkalai had already retired from service, after completing the reemployment period also.

4. This stand of the Government is challenged by the writ petitioner on the ground that whenever any upgradation is ordered, it is only the post, but not the stature of the concerned individual that gets upgraded. This contention of the writ petitioner/first respondent is strongly refuted by the official respondents on the ground that insofar as the Educational Department is concerned, the upgradation is always done only with reference to the qualifications of the person concerned who is holding the post of Grade-II so as to be upgraded to Grade-I and the pupil strength of the School concerned. There is force in the said argument advanced on the part of the official respondents. When the aid granting authorities, in the interest of the pupil, are following such strict principles in the matter of upgradation and when the cancellation of the upgradation of the post was not challenged, we have no hesitation to hold the stand of the official respondents as more pragmatic and in the best interest of the pupil and therefore, the contention of the writ petitioner contra has to fail.

5. Consequent to the retirement of the said Chokkalai, the Chief Educational Officer, Madurai, in his proceedings in M.M.No.5888/B5/2001, dated 7. 2001 has permitted the 6th respondent School to fill up the post of Physical Education Director Grade-II during the academic year 2001-2001. But, even prior to grant of this permission, the School Committee, as per their resolution dated 26. 2001, has called for a list of eligible candidates from the Employment Exchange to fill up the post of Physical Education Director Grade-I and has appointed the first respondent herein as Physical Education Director Grade-I in the School, subject to approval by the Chief Educational Officer.

6. At this juncture, it is relevant to quote Rule 15 (4) (ii) of