Back
D. KRISHNAKUMAR
Fahmidunnisa – Appellant
Versus
Director of Elementary Education, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: The Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records connected with the impugned order passed by 2nd respondent vide Na.Ka.No. 2621/A4/ 2019 dated 25.06.2020 and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondents to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Secondary Grade Teacher in the 4th respondent school w.e.f. 16.07.2018 with all consequential benefits in the light of the order passed in W.P. No. 3189 of 2020 dated 26.02.2020 confirmed in W.A. No. 1090/ 2021 dated 4.2.2021.)
According to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the writ petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher in the fourth respondent School on 13.7.2018. The fourth respondent submitted a proposal to the second respondent on 6.9.2018 for approval of the appointment made by the fourth respondent School. However, the second respondent returned the proposal by proceedings dated 25.6.2020 by citing G.O.Ms.No.165 dated 17.9.2019. Again, the fourth respondent School re-submitted the proposal by clarifying the returns on 20.7.2020 to the second respondent and subsequently
The judgment and government order did not prohibit the approval of appointments made prior to its issuance.
The central legal point established in the judgment is that appointments made by the School Management prior to the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.165 dated 17.9.2019 and proposals forwarded to the educationa....
Government Order G.O.Ms.No.165 is not applicable retrospectively to appointments made prior to its issuance, ensuring approval must be granted for such cases.
The court emphasized the importance of considering the proposal for approval of appointment based on prescribed norms and rules, despite the inoperative government order.
The main legal point established is that the appointment proposal should be approved if it satisfies all prescribed norms and rules and there are no surplus teachers in the school.
The court emphasized the need for the petitioner to comply with the queries raised by the respondent and directed the respondent to consider the application for approval within a specified timeframe.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
