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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 74207

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Honourable Mr Justice R. SURESH KUMAR
THE CHAIRMAN – Appellant
Versus
E.AGALYA – Respondent



IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 01.08.2025 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. DHANABAL W.A.No.241 of 2023 The Chairman Teachers Recruitment Board College Road, Chennai – 6. .. Appellant Vs.

1. E.Agalya

2. The Director of Higher Secondary School Education College Road, Chennai – 6.

3. The Chief Educational Officer Erode District.

4. The District Educational Officer Erode District. .. Respondents Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order dated 05.12.2023 made in W.P.No.33030 of 2013.

For the Appellant : Mr.R.Neelakandan Additional Advocate General assisted by Mr.C.Kathiravan Standing Counsel For the Respondents : Mr.R.Neethiperumal Government Advocate for R2 and R4 No Appearance for R1 and R3 Amicus Curiae : Mr.L.Chandrakumar JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was made by R.SURESH KUMAR, J.)

This intra-Court appeal has been directed against the order passed by the Writ Court dated 05.12.2013 made in W.P.No.33030 of 2013.

2. That the first respondent was having the qualification of B.A. Degree and B.Ed. Degree in the year 2007 and she was also qualified in M.A. Degree in English Literature in the year 2009. After having acquired these qualifications, she registered her name in the Employment Exchange on 10.07.2007.

3. While so, the Government of Tamil Nadu issued Government Orders in G.O.Ms.Nos.145 and 146, School Education (Budget 2) Department, dated 29.06.2009 for appointment of Graduate Assistant in the Higher Secondary Schools. As per the said Government Orders, selection shall be made based on the qualification of various candidates from the names sponsored by the Employment Exchange, after having certificate verification. Therefore, since the name of the first respondent also was sponsored by the Employment Exchange, a call-letter was issued by the appellant on 30.04.2010, calling upon the first respondent to appear on 12.05.2010 for certificate verification.

4. Pursuant to the said call-letter dated 30.04.2010, the first respondent/writ petitioner also appeared before the Authority concerned on 12.05.2010 for certificate verification and the certificates also were verified. Thereafter, no further proceedings have been issued and no appointment order has been given.

5. In the meanwhile, under Section 23 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Eduction Act, 2009, an Academic Authority has been named, that is the National Council for Teacher Education [in short, “NCTE”], which has also issued notification, under which, the NCTE has prescribed the qualification of Teachers Eligibility Test [in short, “TET”], which should be conducted by every State Agencies at various levels, that is Primary, Secondary and Higher Secondary level of Teachers to be recruited for Government, as well as Government Aided Schools and Private Schools.

6. Such notification was issued by the NCTE on 23.08.2010 and by virtue of such notification dated 23.08.2010, which has come into effect from 23.08.2010, the qualification of TET since has been prescribed, even though certificates of the candidates like the first respondent having been verified pursuant to G.O.Ms.Nos.145 and 146, as on 12.05.2010, that is three months prior to the notification issued by the NCTE, subsequently, no appointments have been made. The reason being that, the candidates those who did not have the qualification of TET would not be eligible to be considered for appointment to the post of B.T. Assistant or Secondary Grate Assistant.

7. When this was the position, where the first respondent could not get any proceedings for selection or appointment from the appellant Authorities pursuant to the certificate verification held on 12.05.2010, the first respondent has approached the Writ Court by filing the said writ petition, that is W.P.No.33030 of 2013, seeking a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 therein, who are the appellant and second respondent herein, to select and a

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