The court emphasized the importance of adhering to recruitment bans and upheld the school's right to make decisions regarding appointments and terminations within the self-finance section.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records of the impugned order passed by the 4th respondent through his proceedings No.PPM/C/RS/2019, dated 25.06.2019 and to quash the same as illegal and consequently, to direct the 3rd respondent to approve the petitioner''s appointment as office assistant in the 4th respondent school from the date of his appointment in the light of the order passed by the Court of Madras in W.P.No.1719 of 2005, dated 24.03.2009.)

1. This writ petition is filed for writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned order dated 25.06.2019 passed by the 4th respondent as illegal and consequently to direct the 3rd respondent to approve the petitioner''s appointment as Office Assistant in the 4th respondent school from the date of his appointment in the light of the order passed by the Court of Madras in W.P.No.1719 of 2005, dated 24.03.2009.

2. The contention of the petitioner is that the 4th respondent school is a Linguistic Minority School (Malayalam) institution. Originally the school was High School subsequently the school was upgraded as a Higher Secondary School. There are nearly 1200 students studying in the said school. 45 teaching staffs and 10 non-teaching staffs are working in that school. The petitioner is having the qualification of SSLC. One Office Assistant post became vacant in the 4th respondent school from 01.09.2003 due to the retirement of G. Krishnan Kutti who retired on 31.08.2003. In the said vacancy, the petitioner was appointed as Office Assistant from 01.09.2003. The contention of the petitioner is that the said Office Assistant post is a sanctioned post available in the 4th respondent school for the academic year 2003-2004 as per the staff fixation order, dated 08.11.2003. Since the school being a linguistic minority school, they need not follow the communal roaster and also need not seek any list from the employment exchange, need not obtained prior permission from the Department. In the same year 2003, one Sweeper post was also vacant and the 4th respondent filled that post on 01.06.2003. Thereafter, the school submitted a proposal for approval for the said Sweeper post as well as Office Assistant post. However, the 3rd respondent returned the proposals on the ground that the Secretary to Government of Tamilnadu issued G.O.Ms.No.212 P & AR Department, dated 29.11.2001, in which fresh appointments were banned. Hence, the said two non-teaching staffs appointed in sanctioned posts are not able to get salary and the 4th respondent school preferred a writ petition in W.P.No.1719 of 2005 to quash the G.O.Ms.No. 212 P & AR Department, dated 29.11.2001 and also challenged the order which declined approval.

3. In the above writ petition the school submitted before the High Court that subsequently, the ban was lifted by the Government through G.O.Ms.No.14, P & AR Department, dated 07.02.2006. The school has also relied on the decision of rendered in Thiruvalluvar Higher Secondary School vs. The Government of Tamilnadu reported in 2008 (5) CTC 648. The petitioner also placed reliance on the judgment rendered in W.A.456 of 2008, wherein it has been held that "the Government has issued orders in respect of similar employees approving their services from the date of his initial appointment. When once the ban is revoked the government should have considered and approved the appointment from the initial date of appointment.”

4. In W.P.No.1719 of 2005, the Hon’ble Court vide order, dated 24.03.2009 has held that the judgments and orders in W.A.(MD)No.456 of 2008 makes it clear that the petitioner''s school is entitled to get approval to two persons namely S.Jini part time sweeper from 02.06.2003 who was appointed in resignation vacancy of one Sathasivam from 01.06.2003 and another person namely P.S.Sunilkumar (petitioner in this case) who was appointed as Office Assistant on 01.09.2003