High Court · 2024

W.P.No.19368 of 2011IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 24.01.2024CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARANW.P.No.19368 of 2011S.Sathish ....PetitionerVs1. The Chief Educational Officer, Coimbatore – 641 018.2. The District Educational Officer, Gopalapuram, Coimbatore – 641 018.3. The Secretary, School Committee, Marudamalai Arulmigh Subramaniya Swamy Devastana Higher Secondary School, Vadavalli Post, Coimbatore – 641 041. ....RespondentsPRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to order No.O.Mu.No.6006/A2/2010 dated 24.09.2010 passed by the 2nd Respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Office Assistant with effect from 17.05.2010 and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to ________Page 1 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 2011extend all monetary and other service benefits to which the petitioner is entitled to.For Petitioner: Mr.M.Gnanasekar For R1 to R3: Mr.V.Ramesh Government Advocate O R D E RThe Writ Petition has been filed to call for the records relating to order No.O.Mu.No.6006/A2/2010 dated 24.09.2010 passed by the 2nd Respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Office Assistant with effect from 17.05.2010 and to direct the 3rd respondent to extend all monetary and other service benefits, to which, the petitioner is entitled to.2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, The Director of School Education, Chennai – 600 009, by his proceedings dated 04.10.2010 granted approval for filling up the post of Office Assistant in the 3rd respondent School. This post was vacant from 01.06.2009 in the 3rd respondent School. A notification was issued on 06.04.2010 in Dhinamalar Newspaper calling for application to fill up the post of Office Assistant. Based on the advertisement, 30 persons had applied for the post ________Page 2 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 2011and they were called to attend the interview on 31.05.2010. Petitioner participated in the interview and he was selected. The 3rd respondent by Resolution No.194 dated 17.05.2010 appointed the petitioner as Office Assistant. On 18.05.2010, petitioner joined the 3rd Respondent School. The 3rd Respondent by a note dated 15.07.2010 submitted a proposal to the 1st Respondent for his approval for appointment. The 2nd Respondent by a letter dated 24.09.2010 informed the 3rd Respondent that the post of Office Assistant for the year 2010 to 2011 was not sanctioned and therefore the appointment of the petitioner cannot be approved. In the said circumstances, present Writ Petition is filed.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that, even as per the counter affidavit filed by the respondent 1 & 2, there is an admission that 3rd respondent School had a sanctioned post of one Office Assistant. The Director of School Education in his proceedings in e.f.vz;.98589/b1/,4/07 dated 04.01.2010 sanctioned permission for filling up the post. Accordingly, petitioner was selected and appointed. There is nothing irregular or illegal in his appointment and thus he prayed for allowing this Writ Petition.________Page 3 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 20114. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that, though there was a post sanctioned in the cadre of Office Assistant, after the post fell vacant from 20.02.1987, it was not filled for more than six months. Therefore, the post got lapsed. He further submitted that, at the time of filling the post, there was no post of Office Assistant available for filling up. The order issued by the Director of School Education in his proceedings dated 04.10.2010 was issued by mistake. Relying on this order, petitioner cannot seek to regularize his appointment. He further submitted that, District Educational Officer in his proceedings in X.K.vz;.6006/M2/2010dated 24.09.2010 informed the 3rd respondent that the post of Office Assistant was not sanctioned for the year 2010 to 2011. Therefore, petitioner's appointment cannot be regularized. Prior to that, there was a proceeding issued by the Chief Educational Officer at Coimbatore District in e.f.vz;.8483/m2/2010 dated 14.09.2010 with regard to fixation of staff strength. The said proceedings shows that, there is no post of Office Assistant sanctioned to the 3rd respondent School. In the said circumstances, filling up of the post on the basis of the proceedings of Director of School Education dated 04.10.2010 is not legal and thus he prayed for dismissal of the petition.________Page 4 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 20115. Considered the rival submissions and perused the records. The only ground on which the respondents challenge the appointment of the petitioner is that there was no sanctioned post in the cadre of Office Assistant in the School when the petitioner was appointed. However, in the counter filed by the 1st & 2nd respondent in para(3) it is stated as follows:3.In 1964 staff fixation, the school has a sanctioned post of one Office Assistant ( erstwhile Peon). The post was vacant from 20.02.1987 due to promotion of one Thiru.M.Palanichamy. After that the post was not filled by the 3rd respondent and kept vacant beyond 6 months ( i.e upto 19.08.1987). In G.O.Ms.No.1610 Education dated 13.10.1987 Government Ordered that the posts kept vacant beyond 6 months should not be filled up without getting prior permission of the Government. Hence, the above Office Assistant post lapsed from 20.08.1987 in the above school. Every year in August according to the school strength the staff fixation was made by the 2nd respondent. From August 1987 onwards in the staff fixation order issued by the 1st respondent the column of Office Assistant shown as Nil upto the date.________Page 5 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 20116. From this counter, it can be gathered that, there was a sanctioned post of Office Assistant in the 3rd respondent School but it remained vacant from 20.02.1987. The vacancy was kept beyond six months and therefore if the post is sought to be filled, it can be filled only after getting permission from the Government as per G.O.M.S.No.1610 Education dated 13.10.1987.7. The proceedings of the Director of School Education in e.f.vz;.98589/b1/,4/07 dated 04.01.2010 reads as follows: 2/ nkny Fwpg;gpl;l murhiz kw;Wk; ghh;it (3)y; fhz; muRf; fojj;jpd;go 01/06/09 md;iwa epytug;go Vw;fdnt xg;gspg;g[ bra;ag;gl;l ,sepiy cjtpahsh; gzpaplk; cs;s muR cjtpbgWk; gs;spfspy; jw;nghJ xU ,sepiy cjtpahsh; Tl ,y;yhj 147 gs;spfspy; cs;s 147 ,sepiy cjtpahsh; fhtpg;gzpapl';fisa[k;. mnj nghd;W xg;gspg;g[ bra;ag;gl;l mYtyf cjtpahsh; gzpaplk; cs;s muR cjtp bgWk; gs;spfspy; xU mYtyf cjtpahsh; Tl ,y;yhj 237 gs;spfspy; cs;s 237 mYtyf cjtpahsh; fhypg;gzpapl';fisa[k; epug;gpf; bfhs;s mDkjp tH';fp Mizaplg;gl;Ls;sJ/3/ mjdog;gilapy; fPH;f;fz;Ls;s muR epjpa[jtp bgWk; cah;epiy-nky;epiyg; gs;spfspy; Vw;fdnt xg;gspf;fg;gl;l mYtyf cjtpahsh; gzpapl';fspy; 01/06/09 epytug;go xU mYtyf cjtpahsh; Tl epakdk; bra;ag;glhky; fhypahft[s;s mYtyf cjtpahsh; gzpaplj;jpid fPH;fhz; epge;jidfSf;Fl;gl;L rk;ge;jg;gl;l gs;sp eph;thf';fshy; epug;gpf;bfhs;s mDkjp tH';fg;gLfpwJ/________Page 6 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 2011t/vz;gs;spapd; bgah; kw;Wk; Kfthpjw;nghJ epug;gpf;bfhs;s mDkjpf;fg;gLk; fhypg;gzpapl tpguk; kw;Wk; vz;zpf;if178kUjkiy Rg;gpukzpa njt!;jhd nky;epiyg;gs;sp. tlts;sp nfhak;g[j;Jhh; khtl;lk;mYtyf cjtpahsh; gzpaplk; ? xd;W8. From this proceedings, it is clear that, on the basis of the views of Chief Educational Officer in G.O.M.S.No.189 School Education (D1) Department dated 29.07.2009 and the Government Letter No.275 School Education (D1) Department/09 dated 26.10.2009, the Director of School Education granted permission for filling up of 237 Office Assistants, if there was a sanctioned post of Office Assistants. Only based on this proceedings, petitioner was appointed. Thus, it goes without saying that, though sanctioned post of Office Assistant was vacant from 20.02.1987, by permitting the sanctioned post to be filled up in 237 schools, where there was already sanctioned post of Office Assistant and giving specific permission to 3rd respondent School to fill up the post of one Office Assistant, the Government had accorded permission for filling up the post of Office Assistant by the 3rd respondent. Accordingly, petitioner was appointed by following necessary procedure. 9. Therefore, this Court finds there is no irregularity or illegality in the ________Page 7 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 2011appointment of the petitioner in the 3rd respondent School as Office Assistant. This Court finds there is no merits in the objections raised by the respondents 1 & 2 challenging the appointment of the petitioner in the 3rd respondent School. 10. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. The Order No.O.Mu.No.6006/A2/2010 dated 24.09.2010 passed by the 2nd respondent is hereby quashed. The 2nd respondent is directed to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Office Assistant with effect from 17.05.2010 and the respondents are directed to provide all the service and monetary benefits entitled for the petitioner, as per rules. Parties are directed to bear their own costs. 24.01.2024Index :Yes/NoInternet:Yes/NoSmaTo________Page 8 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 20111. The Chief Educational Officer, Coimbatore – 641 018.2. The District Educational Officer, Gopalapuram, Coimbatore – 641 018.3. The Secretary, School Committee, Marudamalai Arulmigh Subramaniya Swamy Devastana Higher Secondary School, Vadavalli Post, Coimbatore – 641 041. G.CHANDRASEKHARAN, J________Page 9 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 2011SmaW.P.No.19368 of 201124.01.2024________Page 10 of 10

W.P.No.19368 of 2011IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 24.01.2024CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.CHANDRASEKHARANW.P.No.19368 of 2011S.Sathish ....PetitionerVs1. The Chief Educational Officer, Coimbatore – 641 018.2. The District Educational Officer, Gopalapuram, Coimbatore – 641 018.3. The Secretary, School Committee, Marudamalai Arulmigh Subramaniya Swamy Devastana Higher Secondary School, Vadavalli Post, Coimbatore – 641 041. ....RespondentsPRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records relating to order No.O.Mu.No.6006/A2/2010 dated 24.09.2010 passed by the 2nd Respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Office Assistant with effect from 17.05.2010 and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to ________Page 1 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 2011extend all monetary and other service benefits to which the petitioner is entitled to.For Petitioner: Mr.M.Gnanasekar For R1 to R3: Mr.V.Ramesh Government Advocate O R D E RThe Writ Petition has been filed to call for the records relating to order No.O.Mu.No.6006/A2/2010 dated 24.09.2010 passed by the 2nd Respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd Respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Office Assistant with effect from 17.05.2010 and to direct the 3rd respondent to extend all monetary and other service benefits, to which, the petitioner is entitled to.2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that, The Director of School Education, Chennai – 600 009, by his proceedings dated 04.10.2010 granted approval for filling up the post of Office Assistant in the 3rd respondent School. This post was vacant from 01.06.2009 in the 3rd respondent School. A notification was issued on 06.04.2010 in Dhinamalar Newspaper calling for application to fill up the post of Office Assistant. Based on the advertisement, 30 persons had applied for the post ________Page 2 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 2011and they were called to attend the interview on 31.05.2010. Petitioner participated in the interview and he was selected. The 3rd respondent by Resolution No.194 dated 17.05.2010 appointed the petitioner as Office Assistant. On 18.05.2010, petitioner joined the 3rd Respondent School. The 3rd Respondent by a note dated 15.07.2010 submitted a proposal to the 1st Respondent for his approval for appointment. The 2nd Respondent by a letter dated 24.09.2010 informed the 3rd Respondent that the post of Office Assistant for the year 2010 to 2011 was not sanctioned and therefore the appointment of the petitioner cannot be approved. In the said circumstances, present Writ Petition is filed.3. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that, even as per the counter affidavit filed by the respondent 1 & 2, there is an admission that 3rd respondent School had a sanctioned post of one Office Assistant. The Director of School Education in his proceedings in e.f.vz;.98589/b1/,4/07 dated 04.01.2010 sanctioned permission for filling up the post. Accordingly, petitioner was selected and appointed. There is nothing irregular or illegal in his appointment and thus he prayed for allowing this Writ Petition.________Page 3 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 20114. The learned counsel for the respondents submitted that, though there was a post sanctioned in the cadre of Office Assistant, after the post fell vacant from 20.02.1987, it was not filled for more than six months. Therefore, the post got lapsed. He further submitted that, at the time of filling the post, there was no post of Office Assistant available for filling up. The order issued by the Director of School Education in his proceedings dated 04.10.2010 was issued by mistake. Relying on this order, petitioner cannot seek to regularize his appointment. He further submitted that, District Educational Officer in his proceedings in X.K.vz;.6006/M2/2010dated 24.09.2010 informed the 3rd respondent that the post of Office Assistant was not sanctioned for the year 2010 to 2011. Therefore, petitioner's appointment cannot be regularized. Prior to that, there was a proceeding issued by the Chief Educational Officer at Coimbatore District in e.f.vz;.8483/m2/2010 dated 14.09.2010 with regard to fixation of staff strength. The said proceedings shows that, there is no post of Office Assistant sanctioned to the 3rd respondent School. In the said circumstances, filling up of the post on the basis of the proceedings of Director of School Education dated 04.10.2010 is not legal and thus he prayed for dismissal of the petition.________Page 4 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 20115. Considered the rival submissions and perused the records. The only ground on which the respondents challenge the appointment of the petitioner is that there was no sanctioned post in the cadre of Office Assistant in the School when the petitioner was appointed. However, in the counter filed by the 1st & 2nd respondent in para(3) it is stated as follows:3.In 1964 staff fixation, the school has a sanctioned post of one Office Assistant ( erstwhile Peon). The post was vacant from 20.02.1987 due to promotion of one Thiru.M.Palanichamy. After that the post was not filled by the 3rd respondent and kept vacant beyond 6 months ( i.e upto 19.08.1987). In G.O.Ms.No.1610 Education dated 13.10.1987 Government Ordered that the posts kept vacant beyond 6 months should not be filled up without getting prior permission of the Government. Hence, the above Office Assistant post lapsed from 20.08.1987 in the above school. Every year in August according to the school strength the staff fixation was made by the 2nd respondent. From August 1987 onwards in the staff fixation order issued by the 1st respondent the column of Office Assistant shown as Nil upto the date.________Page 5 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 20116. From this counter, it can be gathered that, there was a sanctioned post of Office Assistant in the 3rd respondent School but it remained vacant from 20.02.1987. The vacancy was kept beyond six months and therefore if the post is sought to be filled, it can be filled only after getting permission from the Government as per G.O.M.S.No.1610 Education dated 13.10.1987.7. The proceedings of the Director of School Education in e.f.vz;.98589/b1/,4/07 dated 04.01.2010 reads as follows: 2/ nkny Fwpg;gpl;l murhiz kw;Wk; ghh;it (3)y; fhz; muRf; fojj;jpd;go 01/06/09 md;iwa epytug;go Vw;fdnt xg;gspg;g[ bra;ag;gl;l ,sepiy cjtpahsh; gzpaplk; cs;s muR cjtpbgWk; gs;spfspy; jw;nghJ xU ,sepiy cjtpahsh; Tl ,y;yhj 147 gs;spfspy; cs;s 147 ,sepiy cjtpahsh; fhtpg;gzpapl';fisa[k;. mnj nghd;W xg;gspg;g[ bra;ag;gl;l mYtyf cjtpahsh; gzpaplk; cs;s muR cjtp bgWk; gs;spfspy; xU mYtyf cjtpahsh; Tl ,y;yhj 237 gs;spfspy; cs;s 237 mYtyf cjtpahsh; fhypg;gzpapl';fisa[k; epug;gpf; bfhs;s mDkjp tH';fp Mizaplg;gl;Ls;sJ/3/ mjdog;gilapy; fPH;f;fz;Ls;s muR epjpa[jtp bgWk; cah;epiy-nky;epiyg; gs;spfspy; Vw;fdnt xg;gspf;fg;gl;l mYtyf cjtpahsh; gzpapl';fspy; 01/06/09 epytug;go xU mYtyf cjtpahsh; Tl epakdk; bra;ag;glhky; fhypahft[s;s mYtyf cjtpahsh; gzpaplj;jpid fPH;fhz; epge;jidfSf;Fl;gl;L rk;ge;jg;gl;l gs;sp eph;thf';fshy; epug;gpf;bfhs;s mDkjp tH';fg;gLfpwJ/________Page 6 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 2011t/vz;gs;spapd; bgah; kw;Wk; Kfthpjw;nghJ epug;gpf;bfhs;s mDkjpf;fg;gLk; fhypg;gzpapl tpguk; kw;Wk; vz;zpf;if178kUjkiy Rg;gpukzpa njt!;jhd nky;epiyg;gs;sp. tlts;sp nfhak;g[j;Jhh; khtl;lk;mYtyf cjtpahsh; gzpaplk; ? xd;W8. From this proceedings, it is clear that, on the basis of the views of Chief Educational Officer in G.O.M.S.No.189 School Education (D1) Department dated 29.07.2009 and the Government Letter No.275 School Education (D1) Department/09 dated 26.10.2009, the Director of School Education granted permission for filling up of 237 Office Assistants, if there was a sanctioned post of Office Assistants. Only based on this proceedings, petitioner was appointed. Thus, it goes without saying that, though sanctioned post of Office Assistant was vacant from 20.02.1987, by permitting the sanctioned post to be filled up in 237 schools, where there was already sanctioned post of Office Assistant and giving specific permission to 3rd respondent School to fill up the post of one Office Assistant, the Government had accorded permission for filling up the post of Office Assistant by the 3rd respondent. Accordingly, petitioner was appointed by following necessary procedure. 9. Therefore, this Court finds there is no irregularity or illegality in the ________Page 7 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 2011appointment of the petitioner in the 3rd respondent School as Office Assistant. This Court finds there is no merits in the objections raised by the respondents 1 & 2 challenging the appointment of the petitioner in the 3rd respondent School. 10. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is allowed. The Order No.O.Mu.No.6006/A2/2010 dated 24.09.2010 passed by the 2nd respondent is hereby quashed. The 2nd respondent is directed to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Office Assistant with effect from 17.05.2010 and the respondents are directed to provide all the service and monetary benefits entitled for the petitioner, as per rules. Parties are directed to bear their own costs. 24.01.2024Index :Yes/NoInternet:Yes/NoSmaTo________Page 8 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 20111. The Chief Educational Officer, Coimbatore – 641 018.2. The District Educational Officer, Gopalapuram, Coimbatore – 641 018.3. The Secretary, School Committee, Marudamalai Arulmigh Subramaniya Swamy Devastana Higher Secondary School, Vadavalli Post, Coimbatore – 641 041. G.CHANDRASEKHARAN, J________Page 9 of 10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.19368 of 2011SmaW.P.No.19368 of 201124.01.2024________Page 10 of 10