Back
2014 Supreme(Mad) 12
High Court of Judicature at Madras
R. SUBBIAH, J.
K. Alagarraj
Versus
The State of Tamilnadu, rep. by its Secretary to Government, Education Department, Fort St. George & Others
W.P. No. 34227 of 2013 & M.P. No. 1 of 2013
Decided On: 03-01-2014
For the Petitioner:S.N. Ravichandran, Advocate.
For the Respondents:R. Vijayakumar, Advocate.
The applicability of a government order declaring equivalence and its retrospective effect.
Headnote:
Certiorarified Mandamus - Teacher Recruitment - G.O.(Ms).No.56, Higher Education (K2) Department, dated 24.04.2012 - The court discussed the applicability of the G.O. declaring B.Ed. Special Education as equivalent to B.Ed. General Education and its retrospective effect. The court relied on a previous judgment to conclude that the G.O. is clarificatory in nature and should be applied from the date of the degree obtained by the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a B.T. Assistant, sought the declaration of his probation completion and monetary benefits. The 2nd respondent issued a show cause notice questioning the validity of the petitioner's service based on the equivalence of B.Ed. Special Education to B.Ed. General Education declared in a G.O.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the G.O. declaring equivalence should be applied from the date of the degree obtained by the petitioner, not just for future appointments.
Issues: Validity of the show cause notice, applicability of the G.O. declaring equivalence, completion of probation, and entitlement to monetary benefits.
Ratio Decidendi: The G.O. declaring equivalence should be applied from the date of the degree obtained by the petitioner, and not just for future appointments.
Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, the impugned order was quashed, and the respondents were directed to declare the completion of probation and sanction monetary benefits to the petitioner.
1. This writ petition has been filed praying for issuance of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records pertaining to the proceedings of the 2nd respondent vide Na.Ka.No.12515/C2/E1/2009, dated 21.11.2013, and to quash the same and to direct the respondents to declare the completion of probation of the petitioner on 06.03.2009 and sanction all monetary benefits including annual increment from 2012.
2. The petitioner passed B.Sc. (Chemistry) in the year 1999 and M.Sc., (Chemistry) in the year 2001 respectively. Thereafter, the petitioner studied B.Ed., in Special Education-Mental Retardation at Madurai Kamaraj University and he registered the same in the district employment exchange. Pursuant to the paper advertisement dated 02.09.2006 made by the Teacher Recruitment Board for recruiting B.T. Assistant for the academic year 2006-2007, the petitioner applied for the same and passed the written examination conducted on 05.11.2006. Thereafter, the petitioner appeared for certificate verification on 26.12.2006. After certificate verification by the Teacher Recruitment Board, the petitioner was selected and posted at Government Higher Secondary School, Kalamaruthur, Villupuram District, by an order dated 04.03.2007 passed by the 2nd respondent. The petitioner joined duty and he has completed two years probation on 06.03.2009. However, his probation has not been declared by the respondents. Hence, the petitioner made a request to declare his probation. The Headmaster, Government Higher Secondary School, Kalamaruthur, vide his letter in Na.Ka.No.163/09-10, dated 05.02.2010, recommended to declare the completion of probation of the petitioner, and for that purpose the petitioner had handed over al his original certificates and the same was forwarded to the Chief Educational Officer, Villupuram. But, there was no response from the respondents.
3. On 04.06.2013, on general transfer, the petitioner was transferred from Government Higher Secondary School, Kalamaruthur to Government High School Musundapatti. While so, the 2nd respondent issued impugned show cause notice dated 21.11.2013 stating that on the date of petitioner’s appointment, he was not eligible to be appointed as B.T. Assistant, on the ground that his B.Ed. Special Education is not a valid degree for appointment as B.T. Assistant. In fact, subsequent to the appointment of the petitioner as B.T. Assistant, B.Ed. Special Education was declared as equivalent to B.Ed. General Education by G.O.(Ms).No.56, Higher Education (K2) Department, dated 24.04.2012. Hence, the impugned show cause notice was issued calling upon the petitioner to give explanation as to why the services rendered by petitioner from the date of appointment till the date of issuance of the above said GO (from 07.03.2007 to 23.04.2012) should not be treated as invalid service. The said impugned notice was received by the petitioner during the first week of December-2013. In the meanwhile, the petitioner had passed M.Phil (Chemistry) in the year 2009 and it is higher qualification than B.Ed., General Education. However, since the Government issued G.O.(Ms)No.56, Higher Education (K2) Department, dated 24.04.2012 declaring B.Ed., Special Education as equivalent to B.Ed., General Education, the impugned show cause notice has been issued by the 2nd respondent. Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner has come forward with the present writ petition before this Court.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.
5. The petitioner herein has passed B.Ed. Special Education in Mental Retardation at Madurai Kamaraj University in the year 2005. Pursuant to the advertisement dated 02.09.2006 made by the Teacher Recruitment Board, the petitioner applied for the post of B.T. Assistant and he was selected and issued with an order of appointment dated 04.03.2007 by the 2nd resp
