The legal principle established is that a decision de-recognizing qualifications cannot be applied retroactively, especially when promotions were made in accordance with government orders, and hostile discrimination is evident.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the orders of the second respondent in Na.Ka.No.8208/A4/2010 dated 06.09.2017, confirming the earlier orders passed in Na.Ka.No.8208/A1/08 dated 23.12.2010, quash the same.)

1. Heard Mr.S.Kamadevan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. K.H.Ravikumar, learned Government Advocate appearing on behalf of the respondents.

2. The brief facts of the case is as follows:

2.1. The petitioner had completed the degree of B.A (Tamil) in the year 1995-1998 and the Post Graduation of M.A. (Tamil) between the years 1998-2000. He was appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher (SGT) on 14.12.2000 and thereafter transferred to the third respondent Panchayat School on 24.09.2004. Between 2006-2008, he had completed his B.Ed., degree in the month of June 2008. Thereafter, in May 2009, he had completed B.A. (English) [Double Degree Course offered by Annamalai University].

2.2. On 01.01.2010, a panel for the post of B.T. Assistant (English) was prepared in which the petitioner was placed in the first position and the rival teacher in the second position. Based on the panel, he was promoted as B.T. Assistant (English) on 20.05.2010. The rival teacher had given a complaint on the dual degree obtained by the petitioner, by stating that his B.Ed degree and B.A. (English) degrees were obtained simultaneously. Based on his complaint, the petitioner was reverted to the post of SGT from the post of B.T. Assistant (English) on 23.12.2010. The order of reversion was challenged in W.P.No.30044 of 2010 and by an order dated 24.01.2011, the order of reversion dated 23.12.2010 was set aside on the ground of natural justice and the learned Single Judge had made certain observations on the merits of the matter. Challenging the same, the petitioner has preferred an intra-court appeal in W.A.No.353 of 2011, which was disposed on 14.06.2017, directing the District Elementary Educational Officer, Salem to consider and dispose of the matter, without being influenced by the observations made by the learned Single Judge. In this background, the present impugned order dated 06.09.2017 has been passed, whereby the original order of reversion dated 23.12.2010 was restored and the petitioner was once again reverted back to the post of SGT. This order, is put under challenge in the present Writ Petition.

3. The main ground on which the impugned order has been passed, is on the basis of the decision of this Court in R.Thirunavukarasu and Others Vs. The State of Tamil Nadu, School Education Department, Chennai and Others reported in 2012 (5) CTC 129, whereby it was held that the dual degree obtained by candidates after undergoing a course of duration of one year, cannot be recognised equivalent to a degree obtained over three years. On placing reliance on this decision, the respondents had held that since the petitioner had obtained dual degree of B.Ed., between 2006-2009 and completed B.A. English in 2009, which is not recognised as per the decision in R.Thirunavukarasu''s case (supra), reverted the petitioner to the post of SGT from B.T. Assistant (English). The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the decision in R.Thirunavukarasu''s case (supra), will not have retrospective effect as on the date when he was promoted to the post of B.T. Assistant, the decision was not available, whereas the circulars of the first respondent herein, permitted dual degree.

4. The learned Government Advocate on the other hand cited the decision of the Hon''ble Full Bench in the case of R. Chitra and others V. Member Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu Teachers Recruitment passed in W.P.2807 of 2014 batch etc., dated 26.04.2021 and the well settled law in R.Thirunavukarasu''s case (supra), which ratio has also been upheld by the Hon''ble Division Bench in the case of Pramakumari & Others Vs. The Secretary to