SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Mad) 3915

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R. Suresh Kumar, J.
P. Malathi - Petitioner
Versus
The Director of School Education and ors. – Respondents
W.P.No.649 of 2018
Decided On : 10-06-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr.P.Ebenezar Paul
For the Respondent: Mr.J.C.Durai Raj, Additional Government Pleader Mr.Siddharth, for M/s.BFS Legal

Promotions should be based on merit and ability, with seniority being considered only when merit and ability are approximately equal, as per Rule 15(4) of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulations) Act, 1973.

Headnote:

Writ Petition - Promotion Dispute - Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulations) Act, 1973 - Rule 15(4) - The court discussed the provisions of Rule 15(4) of the Act, which states that promotions shall be made on grounds of merit and ability, seniority being considered only when merit and ability are approximately equal. The court interpreted that merit and ability play a major role in promotions, and seniority is considered only when merit and ability are equal. The court found that the promotion of the petitioner as P.G. Assistant (History) was in line with the rules and set aside the rejection of the promotion by the 4th respondent.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the rejection of her promotion as P.G. Assistant History in a private aided school and to direct the approval of her promotion with salary and benefits. The petitioner had acquired additional qualifications and was considered for promotion, but the promotion was rejected by the 4th respondent.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the promotion of the petitioner was in line with the provisions of Rule 15(4) of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulations) Act, 1973, which emphasizes promotions based on merit and ability, with seniority being considered only when merit and ability are approximately equal. The court set aside the rejection of the promotion and directed the approval of the petitioner's promotion as P.G. Assistant (History) with salary and benefits.

Issues: The issues involved the rejection of the petitioner's promotion as P.G. Assistant (History) in a private aided school, based on the grounds of seniority and feeder category for the promotion.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that promotions should be based on merit and ability, with seniority being considered only when merit and ability are approximately equal. The court interpreted that the petitioner's promotion was in line with the rules and set aside the rejection of the promotion.

Final Decision: The writ petition was allowed, and the rejection of the promotion was set aside. The court directed the approval of the petitioner's promotion as P.G. Assistant (History) with salary and benefits, and clarified the petitioner's entitlement to the difference in salary and arrears.

ORDER :

Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 4th respondent passed in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.3526/B3/2016 dated 1-11-2016 served on the petitioner 21-11-2017 and quash the same and direct the 4th respondent to approve the promotion of the petitioner as P.G.Assistant History in the 5th respondent aided school from 8-8-2016 with salary and other benefits from the said date after adjusting the salary paid as Secondary Grade Teacher.

The prayer sought for herein is for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 4th respondent passed in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.3526/B3/2016 dated 1-11-2016 served on the petitioner on 21-11-2017 and quash the same and direct the 4th respondent to approve the promotion of the petitioner as P.G. Assistant History in the 5th respondent aided school from 8-8-2016 with salary and other benefits from the said date after adjusting the salary paid as Secondary Grade Teacher.

2. The petitioner was employed as Secondary Grade Teacher in a leave vacancy from 18.08.1987 to 15.10.1987 in Holy Ghost Primary School, Manapad, Tuticorin District, which was a minority aided school. Again the petitioner was appointed in leave vacancies from 07.01.1988 to 03.03.1988, 28.08.1989 to 29.09.1989 in the very same school. She was further appointed in a leave vacancy in St.Theresa Primary School, Karur, which is also a aided minority school from 18.07.1990 to 10.08.1990, 21.08.1990 to 24.09.1990, 09.10.1990 to 07.11.1990, 08.11.1990 to 10.12.1990. Again the petitioner was appointed in Holy Ghost Primary School, Manapad from 10.03.1992 to 31.03.1992. The petitioner was further appointed in a leave vacancy from 12.06.1996 to 09.09.1996 in St.Joseph's Girls Higher Secondary School, Choolai, Chennai and from 21.11.1997 to 31.01.1998 in Munusamy Mudaliar Primary School, Netappakkam, Purasaiwalkam, Chennai-7. In all the said leave vacancies period, she was paid salary from the Government funds as the schools where she was working in leave vacancies, were fully aided schools.

3. When that being so, in the 5th respondent School, which was also a Private Aided school, a vacancy arose in MBC roster in Secondary Grade for which the Management called for list from the employment exchange after getting permission to fill up the vacancy. The petitioner's name was sponsored on 05.12.1997 for MBC vacancy.

4. The School committee of the 5th respondent selected and appointed the petitioner from 02.02.1998. The said appointment was approved by the competent authority by order dated 04.08.1998 with effect from 02.02.1998 and thereafter she has been paid the salary from the said date and the petitioner became a Selection Grade-Secondary Grade Teacher from 02.02.2008.

5. In the meanwhile, the petitioner with the permission of the concerned authorities completed B.A. (History) course through correspondence at Madras University and passed the B.A. (History) in 2nd class in May 1998. After joining the school, the petitioner got permission from the 5th respondent school and joined M.A. (History) and passed the same in 2nd class in October 2000. Again the petitioner got permission to join B. Ed., course and passed the same in April 2009. Thereafter, because of the additional qualifications acquired by the petitioner in order to get incentive increments, the proposal was submitted by the 5th respondent School and that was considered and sanctioned by the competent authorities. Accordingly, the incentive increment has also been sanctioned to the petitioner for her additional educational qualifications, as stated supra.

6. Since after completion of ten years, the petitioner was considered for grant of Selection Grade, that was also granted in the year 2009.

7. When that being the position, vacancy arose in the 5th respondent school to the post of PG Assistant (History) with effect from 01.06.2016, because of the e

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top