BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Judgment Reserved On Judgment Pronounced On

04.03.2025 03.06.2025 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE J. NISHA BANU and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY W.A(MD)No.423 of 2025 and C.M.P.(MD).No.3264 of 2025

1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Department of School Education, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009. 2.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai – 600 006.

3.The Joint Director of School Education (Vocational), College Road, Chennai – 600 006.

4.The Chief Educational Officer, Madurai District, Madurai.

5.The District Educational Officer, Madurai District, Madurai. ... Appellants -Vs-

1.N.Prema

2.The Headmaster, Veliveethiyar Corporation Girls, Higher Secondary School, Ponnagaram, Madurai – 625 016.

3. The Commissioner, Madurai Corporation, Madurai.

4.The District Educational Officer, Madurai Corporation, Madurai. ... respondents Prayer : Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letter Patent against the order of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.9781 of 2025, dated 25.07.2024.

For Appellants : Mr.J.Ashok Additional Government Pleader For R1 : Mr.S.Sivasubramanian ******

JUDGMENT

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

This Writ Appeal is filed by the respondents in the writ petition challenging the order dated 25.07.2024 passed in W.P.(MD)No.9781 of 2025.

2. The Writ Petition was filed for Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the impugned letter dated 16.10.2020 of the 2^nd respondent and consequently direct the respondents to regularize the services of the petitioner as Vocational Instructor under the 6^th respondent school, in terms of G.O.Ms.No.35, Education Department dated 09.02.2007 granting all attendant benefits, viz., seniority and other monetary benefits.

3. The brief facts are that the petitioner was working as Vocational Instructor in the 6^th respondent Velliveethiyar Corporation Girls Higher Secondary School. The petitioner is possessing qualification of M.A., B.Ed., possess Training Certification for Typewriting (Higher in both Tamil & English) and certificate course in Computer Application. In the year 1999, the 6^th respondent School introduced Vocational Instruction courses with subject viz, Commerce, Accountancy, Office Management and Type Writing and as per G.O.Ms.No.525 dated 29.12.1997 the 6^th respondent was authorized and permitted to appoint 2 Vocational Instructors, hence the 6^th respondent conducted interview on 09.06.1999, verified educational qualifications, then appointed the petitioner as Vocational Instructor in Office Management and Type Writing on 01.07.1999 and one Mr.P.Ravisangar was also appointed as Vocational Instructor in Commerce & Accountancy besides the petitioner. The 1^st respondent issued G.O.Ms.No.35 dated 09.02.2007 for regularization of eligible Parent Teachers Association (PTA) staffs, then issued Letter dated 13.03.2009 in Na.Ka.No.101568/V1/E1/2004 calling for the details of the PTA staff eligible for regularisation. The 6^th respondent school had sent the details of the petitioner along with one another PTA staff namely Mr.Jeyapal as the eligible candidates for regularization, but the petitioner's name was left out in the list. Hence, the petitioner submitted various representations to the respondents, but no reply was forth coming. Hence, W.P.(MD)No.3608 of 2018 was filed and the same was disposed of directing to consider and pass orders. Again, the petitioner submitted representations on 06.01.2020, 03.02.2020, 19.03.2020 & 22.03.2020. Then the CEO had passed on order dated 31.01.2020 stating the petitioner did not work in a school, hence there is no rule to grant regularisation. The contention of the petitioner is that one Mr.P.Ravisangar, who was appointed along with the petitioner was absorbed. Further across Tamil Nadu, PTA staff from various Corporation Schools were absorbed and regularized under G.O.Ms.No.35 dated 09.02.2007. Hence, Cont.P.(MD)No. 339 of 2021 was filed and the Court closed the cont