COMMON JUDGMENT

DR.G.JAYACHANDRAN,J.

AND C.KUMARAPPAN,J.

R.Latha, the first respondent in these two Writ Appeals is the Petitioner in W.P(MD)Nos. 12688 and 12689 of 2012. Both the Writ Petitions were allowed by a common order, dated 22.04.2014. Being aggrieved, the State has preferred these two Writ Appeals.

2.Before adverting to the merits of the grounds raised in these writ appeals, it is profitable to capitalize the back-ground of the case, which runs as below:

R.Latha, the first respondent/Writ Petitioner has completed her 11th standard in the year 1981.She pursued her education further and obtained a Pre- basic Teachers Certificate in the year 1982 and joined the service as Secondary Grade Teacher on 14.06.1984. She completed her probation and her service was regularised on 13.06.1986. Meanwhile, she obtained Secondary Grade Teacher Certificate in the year 1988. B.Lit degree was completed in the year 1991 and again she completed her Higher Secondary Course in the year 2009. She was promoted as Headmistress on 13.09.2004. She has also acquired M.A degree in the year 1999 and completed her M.Phil Course in the year 2011 and B.Ed degree in the year 2012. All her further educational qualifications were through correspondence and while in service. Her name was not included in the panel for promotion to the post of B.T.Assistant. Being aggrieved, she preferred W.P. (MD)No.12688 of 2012 seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the proceedings of the District Elementary Educational Officer, Karur promoting her juniors, who were arrayed as respondents 5 and 6 and to place her above her juniors in the seniority list and to pay the salary and other monetary benefits. W.P(MD)No.12689 of 2012 was filed seeking issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the impugned proceedings of the District Elementary Educational Officer, Karur, dated 29.06.2012. The first Writ Petition was directed against the non-inclusion of her name in the panel for promotion to the post of B.T.Assistant and the second Writ Petition was directed against the promotion of her juniors. In sum and substance, both the Writ Petitions centered around her contentions that she being fully qualified, to be considered for promotion to the post of B.T.Assistant for the year 2012. Further, her name was excluded but juniors were promoted.

3.This Court, by common order, considering the submission of the State, stating that the Writ Petitioner does not possess the required 10+2+3 qualification(pattern of education) and her qualification and educational service are all through correspondence and private, her name cannot be included in the panel and further regarding promotion of the juniors, she contended that the length of service of the Petitioner, after being transferred to Karur District from Tiruppur, has been reckoned, particularly, the date on which she joined service in Karur District and she cannot take lien of all her past service which she has expressly relinquished,after getting District transfer.The learned Single Judge, on considering the elaborate arguments of the counsels had passed the following order:

‘’7.After elaborate arguents, the learned consel for the petitioner prdouced the copies of the certificates obtained in the year 1981(S.S.L.C); 1983(Pre-Basic Teacher Certificate) and 1988(Secondary Grade TeacherCertificate) respectively and submitted the case of the Petitioner could also be considered as she would also come under the 10+2+3 pattern.

8.In similar circumstances, this Court in K.Chandrasekaran and two others .vs. The Secretary to Government(W.P.Nos.24495 to24497 of 2012, decided on

10.09.2012) held as follows:

‘’4.The learned counsel for the Petitioners would bring to my notice the common order passed in a batch of Writ Petitions by the Honourable Ms.Justice K.Suguna in W.P.Nos.25432 of 2011 and etc batch cases, dated 2.7.2012, wherein, the learned Judge after having considered elaborately all the above aspects, including t