IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 05.01.2026 CORAM :

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R. SURESH KUMAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V. LAKSHMINARAYANAN W.A.No.3694 of 2025 N.Althaf .. Appellant Vs.

1. The Commissioner of School Education DPI Campus, College Road Chennai – 600 006.

2. The Chief Education Officer Chennai District, Presidency Girls Higher Secondary School Egmore, Chennai – 600 008.

3. The District Educational Officer Chennai East, Middle Higher Secondary School Triplicane, Chennai – 600 005.

4. The Correspondent Murthuzaviya Oriental Higher Secondary School No.12/186, Big Street Triplicane, Chennai – 600 005. .. Respondents Prayer: Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, against the order dated 06.01.2025 made in W.P.No.14635 of 2021.

For the Appellant : Mr.V.Ragupathy For the Respondents : Mr.J.C.Durairaj Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R3 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 06.01.2025 made in W.P.No.14635 of 2022.

2. That the appellant was the writ petitioner, who was appointed as an Office Assistant in the fourth respondent School with effect from 26.10.2020 in the vacancy that has been caused by the incumbent one T.M.Humayun on 31.01.2020. It was a sanctioned post and the fourth respondent is a Minority Institution and a recognized one, getting aid from the Government. When the appointment was forwarded to the official respondents for approval, the same was rejected by the District Educational Officer by the proceedings which was impugned before the Writ Court.

3. The reason for such rejection was that, before making an appointment, even in a non-teaching staff post, prior approval must have been obtained, which is reiterated in the Government Order made in G.O.Ms.No.238, School Education Department, dated 13.11.2018. That apart, insofar as the filling up of the posts of non-

teaching staff by aided recognized Schools, such posts should be filled up only on the basis of the excess Teachers available in the Revenue District and that, first, that has to be explored and then only the direct recruitment from the open market candidates should be made by the School Management concerned. These are the two reasons for which the approval has been rejected.

4. When this was challenged, the learned Writ Court, having considered the factual matrix as well as the legal position, has wrongly applied the provisions of the Act, as well as the import of G.O.Ms.No.238 dated 13.11.2018 and has come to the conclusion that, the Government have the constitutional right to revise the norms formulated several decades ago on the basis of the present circumstances and it has got the power of prescribing norms for retaining the non-teaching posts that are sanctioned to Schools and withdraw the existing non-teaching posts and on that ground, there has been no right for the School or the Teacher concerned to seek for approval of the appointment as non-teaching staff in the fourth respondent School even though it being a Minority Recognized Aided School.

5. When this was questioned, after hearing Mr.V.Ragupathy, the learned counsel for the appellant and Mr.J.C.Durairaj, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 3, we are of the view that, since the law has been well settled, where, the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2019 and the Rules made therein would not apply to Minority Schools insofar as prior approval issue is concerned, as such prior approval is not required in making appointment of a non-teaching staff in a sanctioned post in a Minority Aided School.

6. That apart, the erstwhile position was that, even in respect of Non-Minority Schools, insofar as the appointment in non-teaching staff, such prior permission was not required. Even though that position was changed by issuance of G.O.Ms.No.238 or any other Government Orders or Executive Orders made under Arti