The Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) qualification is mandatory for all educational institutions, including minority schools, as per statutory provisions.

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.SRIMATHY, J.

The present writ appeal is filed by the respondents in the writ petition against the order, dated 25.06.2024, passed in W.P.(MD)No.5806 of 2024.

2. The writ petition was filed for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the order, dated 22.02.2024, passed by the 2^nd respondent and consequently, to direct the respondents 1 and 2 to approve the petitioner's appointment as B.T. Assistant (Tamil) in the 3^rd respondent school based on the proposal, dated 12.06.2023, without insisting for qualification of TET in the light of the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court and to disburse grant-in-aid towards salary.

3. The writ petitioner was appointed on 12.06.2023 as B.T. Assistant (Tamil) in the resultant promotion vacancy of one Paul Samuvel, who was promoted as Headmaster in the respondent school herein namely, CMML High School, Vadamalpuram, which is a single management school. The said school was a private aided minority school governed by Tamil Nadu Recognized Private Schools (Regulation Act), 1974 and rules made thereunder and the Tamil Nadu Minority School (Recognition and Payments of Grant) Rules, 1977. The school had submitted the proposal on 12.06.2023, but the same was returned by citing the proceedings of Commissioner of School Education, dated 29.03.2023. Aggrieved over the same, the writ petition was filed.

4.Before the Writ Court the petitioner contended that the order of the Commissioner of School Education, dated 29.03.2023, is not applicable for B.T. Assistants. Hence, the impugned order, dated 22.02.2024, by referring to order, dated 29.03.2023, cannot reject the approval of appointment. The Writ Court had held that the said proceeding is not referring to any government order, hence the same cannot be relied. Further the 2^nd respondent school is a minority institution, hence, TET is not applicable to the petitioner. The Writ Court has relied on the judgment rendered in W.A.(MD)No.313 of 2022 and batch in the case of the Director of School Education and Others Vs. M. Velayutham and Another , dated 02.06.2023, wherein it is held that the TET qualification was not required for appointment of teachers in minority institutions. The Division Bench in turn had relied on the Constitutional Bench of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Pramati Educational and Cultural Trust and Others Vs. Union of India reported in (2014) 8 SCC 1 . Following the aforesaid judgments, the Writ Court held that it is not mandatory to possess TET qualification for teachers working in a minority institution, consequently the Writ Court allowed the writ petition and directed to approve the appointment and grant salary. Aggrieved over the same, the present writ appeal is filed by the State.

5. The contention of the appellants are that the proposal was returned based on the order of the Commissioner of School Education and the Commissioner proceeding states to grant approval for P.G. Assistants only and not regarding B.T. Assistants. On perusal of the same it is seen that the proceedings states as far as B.T. Assistants are concerned separate proceedings would be issued. In such circumstances, the authorities were waiting for further orders regarding B.T. Assistants, hence the proposal was returned. This Court is of the considered opinion that the government had not taken any policy decision regarding approval of appointment as far as B.T. Assistants are concerned. Therefore, the writ petition is premature as far as this ground is concerned.

6. The next contention of the petitioner is that the 2^nd respondent school is a private aided minority