ORDER :

After having completed higher secondary in 10+2 pattern, the petitioner graduated in B.Sc(Mathematics) in the year 1990 and B.Ed in 1992. Based on his qualifications, he was appointed as B.T. Assistant on 19.12.2008. During his service in the respondent School, he was granted permission to pursue P.G.Degree in M.A.Economics, which he completed in December 2013. Since he did not possess bachelor's degree in Economics discipline, he underwent the same later and obtained his degree in B.A.Economics in the month of May 2016. The proposal sent from the Head Master of the School for his promotion to the post of P.G Assistant (Economics) was not considered and his name was omitted in the promotional panel for the post of P.G Assistant (Economics) for the year 2017-2018. When his request for inclusion was kept pending, he approached this Court and his representation was directed to be considered within a stipulated time by order of this Court passed in W.P.No.10343 of 2017 dated 25.04.2013. In consequence to such direction, the impugned order dated 05.07.2017 came to be passed by placing reliance on G.O.Ms.No.65 P&AR Department dated 02.07.2014 and holding that the degree obtained by the petitioner in M.A.(Economics) and B.A.(Economics) during December 2013 and May 2016 respectively, is a reverse degree and therefore, his candidature cannot be considered. Challenging the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the decision of this Court in the case of S.Ashalatha vs. The Director of School Education and another passed in W.P.No.6870 of 2013 dated 25.03.2013 and submitted that a reverse degree obtained in any discipline cannot be a disqualification for consideration for promotion. He also placed reliance on a subsequent decision of a learned Single Judge in W.P.No.1068 of 2014 dated 11.03.2014 in the case of V.Kanimozhi vs. The Director of School Education and another, which judgment had placed reliance on the earlier orders passed by this Court in the case of S. Ashalatha cited supra for the same preposition.

3. Per contra, learned Government Advocate relied upon the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of The Chairman, Teachers Recruitment Board and another vs. A. Varmathi and others passed in W.A.Nos.1496 to 1498 of 2015 as well as the decision in the case of The Chairman, Teachers Recruitment Board and another vs. V.Kanimozhi in W.A.No.805 of 2014 dated 06.08.2014 and submitted that since G.O.Ms.No.107 P&AR Department dated 18.08.2009 has been upheld and amendment has also been incorporated in Section 25 of Tamil Nadu Government Servants (Conditions of Service) Act, 2016, reverse degree in a particular discipline is not a qualification for promotion to the post of P.G. Assistant.

4. Insofar as the reliance on the order in the case of S.Ashalatha vs. The Director of School Education and another passed in W.P.No.6870 of 2013 dated 25.03.2013, the same has been reversed by the Division Bench of this Court in W.A.Nos.1496 to 1498 of 2015 dated 21.08.2018 and therefore, the decision does not require consideration.

5. The learned Government Advocate placed reliance on the decision of the Division Bench in the case of The Chairman, Teachers Recruitment Board and another vs. V.Kanimozhi in W.A.No.805 of 2014 dated 06.08.2014, which had dealt with the scope and ambit of G.O.Ms.No.107 P&AR Department dated 18.08.2009 and had held that the Post Graduate degree obtained in a pattern prescribed under the G.O will not be a valid qualification. The relevant portions read as follows:

5.4. In the case on hand, admittedly, at the time of completing the degree, the respondent did not complete the plus 2 course. That is exactly the reason why she thereafter completed the plus 2 course. This fact has also been observed by the learned single Judge. While it is absolutely open to the respondent to do the same, the question for consideration is, as to whether the said a