Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 62599
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K.Kumaresh Babu, J
G.Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The Director, School Education Department – Respondent
W.P.(MD)No.7817 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.S.Vashik Ali
For the Respondents: Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar, Addl. Govt. Pleader for R1 to R4, Mr.G.Mohankumar for R5
The court mandates resubmission and timely consideration of employment proposals by educational authorities under the relevant constitutional provisions.
Headnote:The petitioner sought a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for approval of his appointment as Post Graduate (History) Teacher based on a proposal from the school. The respondents contended that the proposal had been returned pending resubmission. The court directed the school to resubmit the proposal within four weeks, and the third respondent to consider it within twelve weeks thereafter. The final outcome includes the order for resubmission and consideration of the proposal.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks approval for appointment. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. respondents argue proposal is pending. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. court issues direction for resubmission. (Para 5) |
| 4. writ petition disposed. (Para 6) |
O R D E R
The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition to direct the 3rd respondent herein to consider the proposal dated 20.01.2025 submitted by the 5th respondent school and the petitioner's representation dated 07.03.2025 and pass appropriate orders to accord prior permission for filling up the post of Post Graduate (History) consequently accord approval for the petitioner's appointment as Post Graduate (History) in the 5th respondent school with effect from the petitioner's date of appointment (20.01.2025) and release grand in aid within the time stipulated by this Court.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was appointed as Teacher in a sanctioned post of Post Graduate (History) and had joined service in the fifth respondent School, on 20.01.2025. The proposal had been forwarded to the respondents to grant approval of the appointment and the same had kept pending. The petitioner had made a representation on 07.03.2025. Hence, he seeks a direction to the respondents to consider the proposal to grant approval to the petitioner's appointment.
3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 would submit that pending this writ petition, the proposal submitted by the fifth respondent had been returned to the Management on 02.04.2025 and the same is yet to be re-submitted. He would further submit that the fifth respondent Management had brought under direct appointment and therefore, the claim of the petitioner cannot be considered.
4. The learned counsel for the fifth respondent would submit that the Management Committee of the School had been reconstituted and necessay approval has also been given by the authorities in that regard.
5. In view of the proposal submitted by the fifth respondent with regard to the appointment of the petitioner had been returned by communication dated 02.04.2025, there shall be a direction to the fifth respondent to re-submit the proposal to the third respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and on receipt of the proposal submitted by the fifth respondent School, the third respondent is directed to consider such proposal on merits and in accordance with law within a period of twelve weeks thereafter and pass appropriate orders with regard to the same.
6. With the aforesaid directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No order as to costs.
