JUDGMENT :

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the respondents 3 & 4 relating to the impugned order dated 23.05.2018 in Na.Ka.No.833/A2/2017 and to quash the same as illegal, arbitrary and devoid of merit and consequentially direct the respondents 3 & 5 to accord approval to the appointment of the petitioner in the 6th respondent school as B.T. Assistant (Science) with effect from the date of appointment viz., 01.11.2010 with all service and monetary benefits within a stipulated time.)

1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

2. The seventh respondent is a Minority School, in which, a vacancy arose owing to the resignation of a Secondary Grade Teacher (Science), who was holding an approved post.

3. The petitioner herein was appointed on 01.11.2010 as a B.T. Assistant (Science) by the seventh respondent-School and when the Management had sought for approval of the said appointment, the same came to be rejected by the Educational Authorities through the impugned order dated 23.05.2018, predominantly stating that the School-Management had not taken prior approval from them for such an appointment and also that the post of B.T. Assistant (Science) was not a sanctioned post.

4. While the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that such prior approval for appointment of a teacher in Minority Institution is not mandatory in view of various decisions of this Court, including the decision of the Hon’ble Division Bench in the case of The Government of Tamil Nadu rep. by Secretary to Government, Department of School Education, Madras and Others V. J.Remila and Others reported in 2018 (1) Writ LR 410, which submission was adopted by the seventh respondent-School, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 5 would place reliance on the counter affidavit filed by the Government Educational Authorities and submit that the petitioner was appointed without permission not only from the Competent Authority, but also not for a sanctioned post for B.T. Assistant (Science). According to the learned Government Advocate, the Management-School had filled up the post of B.T. Assistant (Science), when there were already three B.T. Assistant posts for Tamil, Maths and Science and the Management had no prior approval, which is contrary to G.O.(Ms) No.144, School Education Department, dated 04.07.2008.

5. I have given careful consideration to the submissions made by the respective counsels.

6. The issue of requirement of a prior permission for the appointment in a permanent vacancy arising in the Minority Institution is no more res-integra in view of various decisions of this Court rendered in similar cases. So also the claim of the respondents that once the post is sanctioned, it cannot be reconverted in future, has been negatived by this Court.

7. In the case of J.Remila (supra), the facts involved in that case was when the School appointed a B.T. Assistant Teacher in the vacancy of a Secondary Grade Teacher, the proposals for approval was rejected by the Educational Authorities. The stand taken by the Educational Department was that a prior permission for conversion of a post is required for making appointments even in a Minority Institution. Various Government Orders were referred to, in support of their claim including G.O.Ms.No.144, dated 04.07.2008. The Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, had held that these Government Orders are not applicable to the Government Aided Schools and the rejection of the proposal for approval would amount to interfering with the administration of a Minority Institution. The relevant portion of the orders are as follows:-

“17. The Learned counsel for the First Respondent, then drew our attention to the observations recorded by the Learned Single Judge in W.P.(MD)No.18044 of 2011, filed by the Second Respondent, wherein the Government Orders namely, G.O. (Ms).Nos.244, 125 and 144, w