High Court · 2025

W.P.Nos.16570 & 22145 of 2014IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 05.08.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMARW.P.Nos.16570 & 22145 of 2014W.P.No.16570/2014 :1.V.Uma Maheshwari2.V.Poongodi3.T.Andal4.N.Anbukodi5.M.Valarmathi6.K.Shanthi7.J.Idachellammal8.P.Christy Precilla9.K.N.Chenjulakshmi10.A.Panchali11.N.Jayasri...Petitioners-vs-1.The Joint Commissioner (Education), Chennai Corporation Education Department, Chennai.____________Page 1 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16570 & 22145 of 20142.The Educational Officer, Chennai Corporation Education Department Chennai.3.The Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Education Department, Fort St.George, Secretariat, Chennai - 009.4.The Director of Elementary Education, DMS Compound, DPI Campus, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 034.5.S.Valarmathi...Respondents W.P.No.22145/2014 :V.Gayathri...Petitioner-vs1.Education Officer, Education Department, Corporation of Chennai, Ripon Building, Chennai - 600 003.2.Deputy Commissioner, Education Department, Corporation of Chennai, Ripon Building, Chennai - 600 003. 3.Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Ripon Building, Chennai - 600 003....Respondents____________Page 2 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16570 & 22145 of 2014PRAYER: W.P.No.16570 of 2014 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus, forbearing the respondents from conducting counselling for promotion to the post of Primary School Head Master without arriving seniority of the petitioners by placing them under the category of approved Probationers on transfer to Corporation services and consequently promote the petitioners to the post of Primary School Head Master based on the eligibility and seniority retrospectively on par with juniors with consequential and other attendant benefits.PRAYER: W.P.No.22145 of 2014 is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus, to call for the records on the file of the first respondent herein in the impugned Circulars dated 10.07.2014 and 28.07.2014 in File Ka.Thu.Na.Ka.No.E2/4583/2014 and File Ka.Thu.Na.Ka.No.E2/4582/2014 respectively and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to prepare a fresh seniority list in accordance with guidelines in File Na.Ka.No.5939/ED1/2001, dated 15.11.2001, of the first respondent and thereafter conduct the counselling, besides granting promotion with retrospective effect with attendant benefits from the due dates. ____________Page 3 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16570 & 22145 of 2014 For Petitioners in W.P.No.16570/2014: Mr.Shivakumar For Petitioner in W.P.No.22145/2014 : Mr.V.Balasubramanian For Respondents 1 to 4 in W.P.No.16570/2014 & Respondents 1 to 3 in W.P.No.22145 : Mr.Raman Lal,Addl.Advocate General,assisted by Mrs.K.Aswini. For Respondent 5 in W.P.No.16570/2014 : Mr.N.PalanikumarCOMMON ORDERAs the issue that arises for consideration in both these Writ Petitions is one and the same, the Writ Petitions are taken up together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. The petitioners herein were initially appointed as Secondary Grade Teachers in Elementary Educational Service in various districts and then got transferred to Chennai Corporation Schools, as Secondary Grade Teachers.3. The dispute now before this Court is with regard to the manner in which the seniority of the petitioners vis-a-vis the Secondary Grade Teachers, who were already working in Chennai Corporation by the date of joining of the petitioners in the Corporation, is to be fixed. 4. After hearing the arguments for quite some time, it is agreed by the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional ____________Page 4 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16570 & 22145 of 2014Advocate General, appearing for Chennai Corporation, that the seniority of Secondary Grade Teachers, who were transferred to Chennai Corporation, is required to be fixed by properly placing them, depending upon their status as on the date of their transfer i.e., probation, approved probation etc. It is also agreed that in case the petitioners are approved probationers, they are entitled to be placed below the junior most approved probationer in Chennai Corporation in the post of Secondary Grade Teacher, and, in case the petitioners are unapproved probationers, they are liable to be placed below the junior most unapproved probationer as on the relevant date in Chennai Corporation, working in the cadre of Secondary Grade Teachers.5. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the seniority has to be fixed in consonance with the proceedings issued by the Director of Primary Education, Chennai, in Na.Ka.No.5939/ED1/2001, dated 15.11.2001. 6. The learned Additional Advocate General also submitted that the seniority of the petitioners vis-a-vis the private respondent is fixed by following the above said circular and there cannot be any grievance for the petitioners. 7. However, learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that petitioners are placed below the unapproved probationers instead of the ____________Page 5 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16570 & 22145 of 2014approved probationers working in the cadre of Secondary Grade Teachers in Chennai Corporation, as on the relevant date.8. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the private respondent submitted that the petitioners, who came to Chennai Corporation from different districts, are liable to be placed below all the Secondary Grade Teachers working in Chennai Corporation as on the date of their joining in Chennai Corporation, in terms of the undertaking given by them at the time of their transfer to Chennai Corporation. 9. This Court has carefully considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the private respondent and also perused the material available on record.10. On perusal of the transfer order issued in favour of one of the petitioners would disclose that the same is subject to certain conditions, as mentioned therein. The relevant paragraph from the said transfer order reads as under :''2. This order shall not be cancelled or modified. Since transfer is made from a District to Chennai Corporation, she will be treated as junior most in the transferred unit and in case of her probation is declared, she will be kept below the probation declared persons and her probation is not declared, she will be kept below the probation not declared persons, as the case may be. This fact is to be ____________Page 6 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16570 & 22145 of 2014mentioned in the service register of the concerned teacher by the Headmaster/Asst. Educational Officer. Since the transfer is made on request of the teacher, she will be treated as junior most teacher to the teachers of the Corporation of Chennai.'' 11. This Court has perused the Undertaking, said to have been given by the petitioner and entered in the service register of the petitioner, which reads as follows :____________Page 7 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16570 & 22145 of 201412. In terms of the above Undertaking, the petitioners are liable to be placed as junior most in Chennai Corporation. Whether the said junior most is to be understood as placing the petitioners below all the Secondary Grade Teachers working in Chennai Corporation or not, is again a question to be considered. The very same aspect is considered in the Circular, dated 15.11.2001, referred to hereinabove, which provides for placing the Secondary Grade Teachers transferred from other districts to Chennai Corporation as junior most in Chennai Corporation. 13. In terms of the said Circular, the term ''junior most'' is to be understood as junior most in the category to which the respective petitioners belong as on the date of their joining in Chennai Corporation. If the petitioners are approved probationers as on the date of their transfer to Chennai Corporation, they are to be placed as junior most in the category of approved probationers and, in case they are unapproved probationers, they are to be placed as junior most in the category of unapproved probationers in Chennai Corporation. There cannot be any dispute in this regard and it is a settled legal proposition in the mater of fixation of seniority, in the matter of transfer from one unit to other unit. ____________Page 8 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16570 & 22145 of 201414. In the light of the above, this Court is of the considered view that the seniority of the petitioners is to be fixed at the appropriate place as per their status as on the date of their joining in Chennai Corporation, by duly placing them below the junior most approved probationers in case the petitioners are approved probationers and, if the petitioners are unapproved probationers, they are to be placed below the junior most unapproved probationers, working in Chennai Corporation. Accordingly, seniority in the cadre of Secondary Grade Teacher in Chennai Corporation shall be finalised and, thereafter, their entitlement for further promotion to the post of Headmaster shall be considered and appropriate orders be passed, fixing their pay accordingly.15. During the pendency of Writ Petitions, promotions to the post of Headmaster was permitted to be made by this Court, however, subject to the result of Writ Petitions. Accordingly, the respondent - Chennai Corporation effected promotions to the post of Headmaster. Some of the parties to the Writ Petitions have got the benefit of promotions and they also retired from service. However, their pay is stated to have not been fixed in the post of Headmaster and they are drawing the pay/pension in the cadre of Secondary Grade Teacher alone, even as on today. ____________Page 9 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16570 & 22145 of 201416. In case any of the parties to the Writ Petitions were promoted to the post of Headmaster and have already superannuated from service, their pay shall be fixed in the post of Headmaster, and consequent pensionary benefits of those individuals shall also be paid. The entire exercise, as directed above, shall be completed by the respondents as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.17. Writ Petitions stands disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, the connected M.P.Nos.1 of 2014 and 1 and 2 of 2014 are closed. 05.08.2025NCC :Yes / NoIndex :Yes / NoInternet:Yes / NodixitTo:1.The Joint Commissioner (Education), Chennai Corporation Education Department, Chennai.2.The Educational Officer, Chennai Corporation Education Department Chennai.____________Page 10 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16570 & 22145 of 20143.The Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu, Education Department, Fort St.George, Secretariat, Chennai - 009.4.The Director of Elementary Education, DMS Compound, DPI Campus, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 034.5.Deputy Commissioner, Education Department, Corporation of Chennai, Ripon Building, Chennai - 600 003. 6.Commissioner, Corporation of Chennai, Ripon Building, Chennai - 600 003.____________Page 11 of 12 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Nos.16570 & 22145 of 2014MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR, J.dixitW.P.Nos.16570 & 22145 of 201405.08.2025____________Page 12 of 12