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

2024 Supreme(Mad) 308

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R. Suresh Kumar, K. Kumaresh Babu, JJ.
M. Mani (Died) & Others - Appellant
Vs.
State of Tamil Nadu Rep. by Secretary to Government, Personal & Administration Department, Chennai & Others - Respondent
W.A. No. 997 of 2018, W.P. Nos. 11540, 27184, 27185, 28292, 33764 of 2013, 4574 to 4579 of 2015, 4581 to 4583 of 2015, 18697 of 2018, 14477 of 2019, 57 of 2022, 26942 of 2022 & Cont. P. Nos. 20 & 134 of 2022
Decided On : 08-03-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : R. Singaravelan, Senior counsel, C.K. Chandrasekar
For the Respondents: K.V. Sajeev Kumar, Spl. G.P, Assisted by R. Kumaravel, S. Silambanan, AAG, Assisted by A.S. Vijayaraghavan, Advs.

Promotions in government service must adhere to specified educational qualifications, notably the 10+2+3 pattern, to be valid; prior promotions awarded despite this requirement were upheld on grounds of equity.

Headnote:(A) Madras University Act, 1923 - G.O.Ms.No.107, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (M) Department, dated 18.08.2009 - G.O.Ms.No.65 - Personnel and Administrative Reforms (S) Department, dated 02.07.2014 - Qualifications for promotion in public employment in Tamil Nadu - Applicants challenged the exclusion for promotions as Section Officers based on educational qualifications acquired via the Open University System - Court found that qualifications must have been secured per the prescribed 10+2+3 pattern to be valid. (Paras 19, 39, 46)

(B) Principle of equity - The promotions granted prior based on seniority and qualifications were not to be disturbed, despite them not adhering to the mandated educational pattern. (Para 70)

Facts of the case:
Petitioners, who began service in the University with SSLC qualifications, sought promotion to Section Officer post having further qualified through Open University but were denied based on G.O. stipulations regarding requisite educational patterns.

Findings of Court:
The University’s adoption of the G.O.s regarding educational qualifications for promotions was upheld, and promotions previous granted were allowed to stand based on equity.

Issues: Whether qualifications obtained outside the 10+2+3 educational model could be acknowledged for promotions within the University framework under the Tamil Nadu service rules.

Ratio Decidendi: Court upheld the validity of denying promotions to individuals who did not meet the 10+2+3 educational criteria as mandated by government orders while allowing previously granted promotions on equity grounds.

Result: Writ Appeal dismissed; the substantive rights of OUS candidates were not disturbed, but their capability for future promotions remained constrained.

Table of Content
1. final rulings against the claims for promotion (Para 1 , 72)
2. background of appellants' qualifications and promotions (Para 2)
3. observations on governing laws and educational qualifications (Para 5 , 6 , 9)

JUDGMENT :

R. Suresh Kumar, J.

(Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under of the Letters Patent Act, to set aside the order of dismissal dated 02.04.2018 made in W.P.No.7472 of 2018, thereby allow the W.P.No.7472 of 2018.)

1. The core issue raised in this batch of cases since is one and same, with the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, all these cases, i.e., writ appeal, writ petitions as well as contempt petitions were heard together and are disposed of by this common order.

2. Background facts:

2.1. That the respondent University of Madras (in short "The University" is a State University, has been functioning under the Madras University Act, 1923. The writ appellant in W.A.No.997 of 2018, M.Mani and others had initially entered into service as Assistant in the University, where the prescribed qualification was only SSLC (Fail). Those who had entered into service with that qualification, subsequently wanted to qualify themselves, therefore they have written entrance examination and after having passed out the entrance examination, they joined the University in UG Degree, i.e., B.A., course through Open University System and they become successful in the Degree. In addition to that, all of them have acquired the additional qualification of Typewriting in English. Since at the initial stage, they entered into service only with the qualification of 10th Standard fail, subsequently, some of them passed the 10th Standard in March 2014, some of them passed in March 2017 and some of them have not passed 10th Standard and thereafter some of them passed 12th Standard in 2016, 2018 etc., and some of them have not passed 12th Standard. Thereafter they cleared the further degree and some of them even become successful in PG Degree. All these qualification they acquired only through Open University System.

2.2. From the post of Assistant, they had been further promoted as Assistant Section Officer, their further promotion was Section Officer, which promotion according to them was due. However such a promotions had not been given to them or they had not been considered for such a promotion to the post of Section Officer.

2.3. The reason being for such a non-consideration of promotion to the post of Section Officer, according to them that, their qualification which they acquired subsequent to the joining in the Service at University through Open University System is not inconsonance with the Government Order issued in this regard by the Government of Tamil Nadu in G.O.Ms.No.107, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (M) Department, dated 18.08.2009, as the said Government Order has envisaged that, for the purpose of public employment in the State, where the UG degree of Post Graduation if are prescribed as a qualification, such a qualification must have been earned by those aspirants through the 10+2+3+2 pattern.

2.4. That means, after completion of SSLC-10th standard, they should have pursued their +2 course, i.e., 11th and 12th on regular basis and thereafter only if they joined a UG Degree course through the Open University Scheme or Regular scheme and become successful in the UG Degree, such a UG Degree would be considered as a valid qualification. Like that, after completion of UG Degree under the method said above if they further pursued the PG qualification and if they become successful in such PG qualification either in Regular mode or Open University Scheme, such a PG qualification also can be considered as a valid qualification. Without this valid qualification of UG Degree or PG Degree as the case may be secured after having undergone the 10+2 pattern and PG Degree in Open University Scheme, without this 10+2+3 pattern, such a UG Degree or PG Degree cannot be considered as a qualification for appointmen

        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