No Acts & Articles mentioned in this case
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Reserved On : 13.06.2024
Delivered On : 11.09.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
W.P.(MD)Nos.25280, 25285, 25286, 25287, 25288, 25281, 25282,
25283, 25284 of 2023, 165, 197, 657, 713, 715, 716, 714, 1878, 3477,
3712, 3715, 3716, 3717, 3718, 5782, 3713, 3714, 3735, 5528, 5623
and 5760 of 2024
and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.21474, 21476, 21477, 21469, 21470, 21471, 21472,
21473, 21478 of 2023, 187, 219, 220, 658, 715, 718, 714, 712, 711,
723, 725, 1888, 1889, 3445, 5452, 3647, 5259 and 5327 of 2024
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023:-
R.Arul ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Director of Elementary School Education,
D.P.I. Compound,
College Road, Chennai.
2.The District Educational Officer (Elementary),
Tenkasi District,
Tenkasi.
3.The Block Educational Officer,
Kuruvukilam Range,
Tenkasi District.
4.The Correspondent,
TDTA V.M.Middle School,
Vagaikulam,
Tenkasi District.
1/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
5.The Chief Educational Officer,
Tirunelveli District.
6.The Chief Educational Officer,
Tenkasi District. ... Respondents
(R5 & R6 are suo moto impleaded vide
Court order dated 29.02.2024 in
W.P.(MD)Nos.25280 to 25288 of 2023
and 165 of 2024 by LVGJ)
PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the 2
nd
and 3
rd
respondents to
approve the appointment of the petitioner as Secondary Grade Teacher in
the 4
th
respondent School from the date of appointment i.e., from
12.10.2015.
For Petitioners : Mr.S.Chellapandian,
T.Pon Ramkumar,
S.Lenin Prabhu,
V.Panneer Selvam,
S.Nedunchezhiyan
For Respondents 1 to 3, 5, 6 : Mr.D.Sadiq Raja
Additional Government Pleader
Mr.N.Ramesh Arumugam,
Government Advocate
Mr.M.Sarangan,
Additional Government Pleader
Mr.P.T.Thiraviyam
Government Advocate
For 4
th
Respondent : Mr.Alwin Balan,
Standing Counsel
COMMON ORDER
Prologue:-
“White collar crimes are committed by people who enjoy
the high social status, great repute and respectability in their
occupation.”
-Edwin Hardin Sutherland,
Criminologist.
2/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
Public Policies pertaining to various departments are devised by the
Government with perception of policy effectiveness intending to transform
and improve the administrative mechanism of the State tending towards
building the economy and development of the country ensuring a welfare
state. Whenever a policy of the State fails due to the prevailing tainted field
administrative set up, the mission boggles and collapses on implementation,
without realizing the visionary zeal of the policy makers. The gap between
policy formulation and implementation widens due to corrupt practices and
the same pervades uniformly across every department of the current
administrative set up.
2.The most pernicious of all the white-collar crimes in India is
undoubtedly corruption, the evolution of which could be mapped back to the
British Colonial period. Post Independence, several sensitive cases of
corporate fraud and financial embezzlement have cropped up from time to
time till date involving various Public Sector undertakings and Government
officials, giving way to the collapse of several Government establishments.
3.A public policy to achieve it's target of societal transformation
require an effective implementing mechanism driven by honest and
committed Government servants contributing towards a perfect
administration. The soul of Good Governance vests with a robust and
3/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
honest administration.
4.Here is a case, by which this Court envisage the anomalies which
plagues the gap between the policy makers and implementing administrative
setup in the department of education in the State of Tamil Nadu, which has
resulted in pestering the financial burden of the State. During 1956, under
the capable leadership of the then Chief Minister, the school education
department of the State of Tamil Nadu gained momentum by the
introduction of mid-day meal scheme, improving the enrollment of students
in all the Government primary and middle schools across the State. In due
course of time, the mushroom growth of private stake holders in the field of
education resulted in drop of strength in Government and aided schools
across the State. This resulted in running hundreds of government and
aided schools with hundreds of surplus teachers without student strength.
Despite drop in students strength, establishment of new schools became
manifold.
5.In due course of time during 1980s, the Government of Tamil Nadu
found it difficult to support such schools with grants due to financial and
budgetary constraints. Under such scenario, the State legislature found it fit
to regulate the sanction of grant and additional posts to the private aided
schools. In view of the pressure from these institutions for sanction for
teaching grants and additional posts, the Government studied the entire
4/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
issue in depth with reference to the availability of resources.
6.In order to provide teaching grant to the schools opened up to
1987-1988 and to formulate revised norms, orders were issued at the first
instance, in G.O.Ms.No.340, Education, dated 01.04.1992, accepting the
norms recommended by the committee constituted for this purpose.
Thereafter, from time to time, several Government orders were issued in this
regard. While so, in the light of the discussions and deliberations of the High
power official norms Committee, School Education Department, G.O.Ms.No.
525, School Education (D1) Department, dated 29.12.1997 came to be
issued revising the norms of assessment of grant for Teaching posts and
fixation of staff strength in Elementary/High/Higher Secondary Schools, for
the purpose of State aid.
7.The requirement of additional posts by new schools became a
burden to the Government, as a result of which the State legislature decided
to limit the annual sanction of additional posts. Hence, while giving
recognition to opening/upgradation of new schools, they were informed that
no State aid would be extended. But most of these managements, after
accepting recognition without aid, started filing Writ Petitions in the High
Court, Madras, claiming the sanction of teaching grant for all the posts in
their schools. A fleet of cases including several batch cases came to be filed
year after year by various schools/employees and the Hon'ble Division
5/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
Bench of this Court, to give quietus to such pending litigations, vide a
Compendium of Schedule with discreet directions to the authorities in W.A.
(MD)No.76 of 2019, batch, dated 31.03.2021, swirled its judicial whip to
regulate the anomalies encompassing the school education department.
8.In every legal battle initiated by such institutions/appointees of
such private institutions, this Court has seen the war cry of the learned
counsels representing the State, to save the Government's strained financial
and budgetary implications. But the unmindful corrupt administrative
mechanism of the State Educational Department by passing various
incongrous orders has consistently facilitated these private
institutions/appointees to march to this Court only to conveniently salvage
their avocation, much to the detriment of the State's policy. Pained by the
predominant viciousness prevailing in the department of education in the
State of Tamil Nadu, this Court assertively grouped 30 cases pertaining to a
single Corporate Management to show case to the Government, as to how a
syndicate of kakistocracy among the officials in education department,
systematically facilitate to defeat the policies of the State from time to time,
for unethical ends.
9.A batch of 30 Writ Petitions have been filed, either seeking to direct
the respective authorities of the respective Educational District to approve
the appointment of the Teachers who were appointed in the various schools
6/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
run by the Corporate Management, namely, TDTA, or to quash the
impugned orders passed by the respective educational Authorities
returning/rejecting the proposal to approve the appointment of Teachers
who were appointed in the sanctioned vacancies in various schools under
the TDTA Corporate Management. All the individual appointees have been
appointed as Secondary Grade Teachers/BT Assistants/Tamil Pandits
respectively.
10.For the sake of convenience, the exclusive details of the petitioners
herein with crisp particulars are tabulated here under:-
S.N
o.
W.P.No.&
Petitioner Name
Name of the
School
Date of
Appointmen
t
Date of
proposal of
appointmen
t
Date of
return/reje
ction of
proposal
Reason
1. 25280/2023
R. Arul
POST-
Secondary Grade
Teacher in post
vacant on
31.12.2014 due to
retirement of Mrs.
Daisy Glory Bhai
TDTA VM Middle
School Tenkasi
12.10.2015 28.10.2015
08.03.2021
(Pending)
18.07.2017
2. 25281/2023
Jeya Thenila
POST –
Secondary grade
teacher became
vacant on
26.08.2015 due to
transfer of Mrs.
Yogarani
TDTA Primary
school, Tenkasi
09.10.2015 10.12.2015
13.3.2020
(Pending)
7/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
3. 25282/2023
Elizabeth Rani
POST-
Secondary grade
teacher became
vacant on
28.02.2017 due to
retirement of Joy
Jemimah
C.M.S. Usborne
Middle School,
Tirinelveli
06.04.2017 08.06.2017
15.03.2020
(resubmit)
04.12.2019
26.05.2020
4. 25283/2023
Mary
POST-
Secondary Grade
Teacher post
vacant on
30.06.2015 due to
retirement of
Ponuraj
TDTA Middle
school, Tenkasi
12.10.2015 06.02.2016
03.01.2017
08.03.2021
(Pending)
07.10.2016
18.07.2018
5. 25284/2023
Salomi Jansi Rani
POST-
Secondary Grade
Teacher in post
vacant on
07.03.2017 due to
the promotion of
Mrs. Pandimadevi
TDTA Primary
school, Tenkasi
5.10.2017 25.10.2017
08.03.2021
(Pending)
6. 25285/2023
Jeya Rani
POST-
Secondary Grade
Teacher vacant on
21.06.2016 due to
transfer of Mrs
Gladis Josephin
TDTA Middle
School, Tirinelveli
22.02.2016 14.10.2016
28.08.2023
(Pending)
20.10.2016
7. 25286/2023
Velu Thai
POST-
Secondary Grade
Teacher vacant on
31.07.2017 due to
retirement of
Jayarani
TDTA Middle
School,Tenkasi
06.04.2017 01.09.2017 23.11.2019
8/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
8. 25287/2023
Uma Maheswari
POST-
Secondary Grade
Teacher post
vacant on
25.08.2015 due to
promotion of Mrs.
Esther Chellathai
TDTA Middle
School,
Tenkasi
16.11.2015 06.12.2016
30.08.2018
24.02.2020
(Pending)
04.01.2016
12.12.2019
9. 25288/2023
Arul Deva
Nayagam
POST-
Secondary Grade
Teacher due to
vacancy of transfer
of T. Anita on
26.08.2015
CM Primary
School, Tirinelveli
09.10.2015 30.08.2017
06.04.2018
12.03.2020
(Pending)
30.08.2017
03.09.2019
10. 165/2023
K. Jebastar
POST-
Secondary Grade
Teacher due to
retirement of
Janshi Rani on
28.02.2023
TDTA Primary
school,
Tirinelveli
12.04.2023 07.10.2023 14.01.2023 The
proposal
shall be
considered
after issuing
guidelines
by the 1
st
Respondent
(Director of
District
Elementery
Education)
11. 197/2024
Arul Marry Milred
POST- B.T.Asst
(Maths) post
vacant due to
transfer of
Prabhavinodhini
Barenbuck Higher
secondary school
04.06.2019 25.07.2019
10.08.2020
08.08.2019
21.08.2020
G.O.165
dated
17.09.2019
Surplus
9/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
12. 657/2024
Daisybha
POST-
Secondary Grade
Teacher in post
vacant on
11.10.2015 due to
retirement of Mrs.
Vanajauhthal
TDTA Primary
school, Tirinelveli
12.10.2015 12.11.2015
04.03.2017
10.10.2023
(Pending)
03.02.2017
13.11.2017
13. 1878/2024
Sweetlin
POST –
B.T. Asst(Maths)
post vacant on
23.11.2019 due to
retirement of
Manoharan Mosses
St. Jones
Hr.sec.school,
Tirinelveli
29.09.2020 Proposal
sent
immediately
after joining
on
29.09.2020
11.12.2023 Surplus
14. 3477/2024
Antony Ammal
POST – Secondary
grade teacher post
vacant due to
retirement of
Ananda Mercalin
TDTA Primary
school, Tirinelveli
21.06.2016 08.08.2016
17.12.2020
20.12.2023 Surplus
Proposal can
be
considered
after
deployment
SLP Dairy
No.
15702/2021
pending
15. 3712/2024
Saboral Marry
POST- Graduate
teacher (Maths) in
post vacant on
12.10.2015 due to
transfer of T.
Seeniammal
TDTA Middle
School, Tirinelveli
17.01.2018 07.10.2023
to
R1,R2,R4,R5
and
12.12.2023
to R3
(Pending)
16. 3713/2024
Muthu Pandi
POST-
Graduate teacher
due to the
retirement of
Tamilselvam
TDTA Primary and
Middle school,
Tirinelveli
23.09.2017 30.10.2023
to R1,R2,R4
and R5 and
12.12.2023
to R5
(Pending)
10/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
17. 3714/2024
Kasi Rajan
POST-
Graduate teacher
due to vacancy of
retirement of R.
Tamilarasi
TDTA Middle
school, Tenkasi
20.02.2019 20.02.2019
(Pending)
18. 3715/2024
M Bushparaj
POST-
Secondary Grade
Teacher due to
vacancy of
promotion of R.
Rajammal
TDTA Primary
school, Tirinelveli
01.08.2019 06.10.2023
(Pending)
19. 3716/2024
Kanagamani
POST-
Graduate teacher
(Science) in post
vacant due to
transfer of J.
Shanthi
TDTA Primary and
Middle
school,Tenkasi
06.10.2017 12.12.2023
(Pending)
20. 3717/2024
Anitha Christy T
POST-
Graduate teacher
(Science) in post
vacant on
01.04.2019 due to
promotion of C.
Agnes Paul
TDTA Primary and
Middle school,
Tirinelveli
02.04.2019 22.08.2023
to R3
06.10.2023
to
R1,R2,R4,R
5 (Pending)
21. 3718/2024 K Iyyar
Selvam
POST-
Graduate
teacher(Tamil) in
post vacant due to
promotion of J.
Anna Boss
TDTA Middle
school, Tenkasi
03.08.2017 06.10.2023
to R1,R4 and
R5
12.12.2023
to R3
(Pending)
22. 5782/2024
Maria Stella
POST –
Secondary Grade
Teacher post
vacant on
03.12.2014 due to
promotion of K. Viji
TDTA Middle
school, Tenkasi
05.12.2014 18.02.2023 W.r.t order
in W.P.(MD)
22493/2016
, Na.Ka. No.
1153/Aa5/2
017 dated
20.03.2017
and order in
W.A.(MD)
1140/2018,
approval
cannot be
granted
without
deploying.
11/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
23. 3735/2024
Stancy T
POST –
B.T. Asst Tamil
(Pundit) teacher
became vacant on
31.03.2016 due to
retirement of Mrs.
Sulochana
CMC Marry Arden
Middle school,
Tirinelveli
22.04.2016 03.04.2016 12.12.2023 Surplus
24. 5528/2024
Jaya G
POST-
Upgraded B.T.Asst
post vacant due to
one
Shenbagalakshmi
on superannuation
TDTA Middle
school, Tenkasi
17.01.2018 17.01.2018 10.07.2023 Send
representati
on to
concerned
B.E.O
25. 5623/2024
Leema J
POST- B.T.Asst,
due to
superannuation of
P.Kumuran on
30.06.2017 and
post was upgraded
as B.T. Asst on
05.10.2017
TDTA Middle
school, Tenkasi
05.10.2017 01.10.2017 10.07.2023 Send
representati
on to
concerned
B.E.O
26. 5760/2024
Prince Selva Mery
S
POST- Secondary
Grade Teacher in
post vacant due to
promotion of I.
Yovan as HM on
03.06.2019
TDTA Primary
school,Tenkasi
04.06.2019 19.06.2023
27. 713/2024
Magdline
Dhavamani
POST – B.T.Asst
(Science) post
vacant due to
retirement of
Vanitha Pramila
Sara Tucker
Higher secondary
school, Tirinelveli
03.06.2019 20.07.2018
10.11.2020
25.10.2019
05.02.2021
29.09.2021
(impugned)
Surplus
28. 714/2024
Jenifer Rajathi
POST –
B.T.Asst (Science)
post vacant due to
transfer of P.
Selvamathi Jasinth
Sara Tucker
Higher secondary
school, Tirinelveli
03.06.2019 09.07.2019
10.11.2020
06.08.2021
05.11.2019
30.07.2021
20.09.2021
(impugned)
Surplus
29. 715/2024
Manoranjitham
POST –
Tamil pundit post
vacant due to
retirement of D.
Jessie Jicky
Sara Tucker
Higher secondary
school, Tirinelveli
03.06.2019 04.03.2020
10.11.2020
22.02.2021
29.06.2020
05.02.2021
23.07.2021
29.09.2021
(impugned)
Surplus
30. 716/2024
Roselin Mano
Shakila
POST –
Tamil pundit post
vacant due to
transfer of V.
Granapoo
Sara Tucker
Higher secondary
school, Tirinelveli
31.07.2018 04.10.2018 29.09.2021
(impugned)
Surplus
12/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
Tinnelvelly Diocesan Trust Association Corporate Management :-
11.The Tirunelveli and Tuticorin Diocese together runs a total number
of 323 schools, that is, 249 primary schools and 74 middle schools
respectively, in the educational Districts of Tirunelveli, Valliyur, Tenkasi and
Sivakasi. The Diocese of Tirunelveli and Tuticorin together constitutes the
Tinnelvelly Diocesan Trust Association (hereinafter referred to as 'TDTA' for
short) Corporate Management. The Manager of TDTA primary and middle
schools, Diocesan Office, Palayamkottai, has filed a comprehensive report on
the complete details as to the student Teachers ratio, deployment and
surplus position in all these 323 schools run by the aforesaid Corporate
Management.
12.An anxious perusal of the aforesaid report along with documents
would make it clear that, pursuant to the proceedings of the District
Elementary Education Officer, dated 30.01.2013 and 25.09.2013, directing
the corporate management to deploy the surplus Teachers, TDTA has
deployed surplus Teachers on 19.02.2013 and 26.09.2014 respectively and
the same has been intimated to the authorities concerned, following which,
the appointment of Teachers during that period of time was also approved
from the date of appointment. However, the scenario changed after 2014.
Post 2014, only during the year 2019, the Chief Educational Officer vide
proceedings in Na.Ka.No.12248/E1/2018, dated 14.02.2019, directed the
13/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
corporate management to deploy the surplus Teachers and the surplus
Teachers were also duly deployed on 19.02.2019 and was intimated
promptly to the education Authorities, which was also approved by them.
However, the approval of appointment of Teachers who were appointed post
2014, was kept pending by the authorities concerned. On 16.03.2023, the
District Educational Officer (Elementary) vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.
0087/Aa3/2022, directed the Corporate Management to deploy the surplus
Teachers in the educational District of Tirunelveli, Valliyur and Tenkasi.
Following which, TDTA duly deployed the Teachers and intimated the same
to the education authorities, which was also approved by them. Pursuant to
the proceedings of Tirunelveli District Educational Officer (Elementary) in
Na.Ka.No.597/Aa3/2022, dated 10.01.2024, the Valliyur District
Educational Officer (Elementary) in NaKa.No.2414/Aa1/2023, dated
23.01.2024 and the Valliyur District Educational Officer (Elementary) in
Na.Ka.No.1130/A1/2023, dated 30.01.2024, directed the TDTA
Management to deploy the surplus Teachers in the education Districts of
Tirunelveli, Valliyur and Tenkasi. Following which, the surplus Teachers
were deployed, due intimation was given to the education Authorities, which
was later approved by them. Despite promptly deploying the surplus
Teachers as directed by the authorities concerned, the Teachers who were
appointed in the sanctioned vacancies, which had arisen in the various
schools run by the TDTA management is kept pending without approval by
the authorities concerned. Despite prompt deployment of surplus Teachers
14/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
by the TDTA management as and when a report has been received from the
education authorities, the Teachers appointment is not promptly approved
by the authorities concerned. Though approximately 493 secondary grade
posts were surrendered during the fixation process by the TDTA
Management, despite having excess strength not even a single needy post is
granted by the authorities till date. That apart, the plight of the Management
is that the staff fixation, which is to be carried out by the education
authorities during the month of August and September were not done
periodically and the fixation came to be done only at a later point, that is, at
the end of the academic year or even after the academic year and
interestingly, in few years, fixation was not even done. In the result, the
various appointments, which were made from the year 2014 in the various
schools run by the corporate management are pending before the authorities
for approval without consideration till date. Under such scenario, the
individual appointees/school concerned are before this Court, seeking
approval of the appointment of the Teachers in the various schools run
under the TDTA corporate management. The various proposals submitted by
the concerned schools with respect to the appointment of the individual
appointees are rejected/returned/kept pending without consideration by the
authorities on the following grounds:-
i)There are surplus Secondary Grade/BT Assistant/Tamil Pandit
Teachers in the concerned school or in the corporate Management.
ii)G.O.Ms.No.165, dated 17.09.2019, School Education Department
15/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
mandates that fresh appointments of teaching faculty in any vacancy, which
had arisen, due to any reason, cannot be approved, unless and until the
deployment of the Teachers in the corporate management in the schools run
by the corporate management is completely exhausted.
iii)The interim order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this
Court in W.A.(MD)No.76 of 2019, batch, on 09.04.2019, mandated
exhaustion of surplus Teachers by the corporate Management by deploying
them to the needy schools run by the respective managements.
iv)As against the common judgment passed by the Hon'ble Division
Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD)No.76 of 2019, batch dated 31.03.2021,
Special Leave Petitions are pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court.
v)Pursuant to the proceedings of the Commissioner, School
Education/Director Elementary Education in Na.Ka.No.
34118/D1/E4/2013, dated 29.03.2023, guidelines with respect to the
appointment of post other than Headmaster and PG Assistants are awaited.
13.The issue of refusal, return of proposals to approve the
appointment of Secondary Grade T eachers/BT Assistants/Tamil Pandits,
etc, in sanctioned vacancies in the schools run by a Corporate Management
is no more res integra. Even in the lis in hand, the crux of the issue revolves
around the non-consideration of approving the appointments of the
Teachers appointed in sanctioned vacancies in the schools run by the TDTA
Corporate Management. This Court has dealt with the same in umpteen
16/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
number of cases, more particularly the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court
in W.A.(MD)No.639 of 2015, batch, dated 17.06.2015, reported in 2015 SCC
Online Madras 14263, has dealt with a similar issue pertaining to the same
Corporate Management, that is, the TDTA group of Schools and the relevant
portion of the same is extracted as follows:-
“5.It is seen that 247 Primary Schools and 73 Middle Schools are
being run by TDTA. When excess teachers are available in a number of
institutions run by the 2nd respondent Management, as of today, in fairness
to the claim and demands of the students, the 1st appellant herein should
take immediate steps to deploy the 68 excess teachers, immediately, to the
schools where vacancies are to be filled, which is stated to be 73 in number.
8.As stated supra, inasmuch as appointments of the writ petitioners
were made against sanctioned posts in the respective schools. Observations
made in the W.A.No.70 of 2012 dated 13.03.2012, granting permission to
the District Elementary Educational Officer, Tirunelveli, to take steps, to
deploy excess 12 teachers, from the schools under the same management,
cannot be a ground, to deny approval of appointments of the writ petitioners,
as Secondary Grade Teachers in the schools, in which, they were appointed.
When the school management sends a proposal for approval of the teachers,
the educational authorities have to consider, as to whether such teachers
have been appointed against sanctioned posts and whether they are
qualified for such appointment. Rule of reservation wherever applied is also
verified. On the above aspects, there is absolutely no quarrel by the
educational authorities.
9.When a specific question was posed to the learned Special
Government Pleader, as to whether appointment of Mr.S.Austin Jeba
17/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
Solomon, a teacher in TDTA Primary and Middle Schools, Devarkulam
Pastorate, Tirunelveli District/1st respondent in W.A(MD)No.70 of 2012 was
approved or not, notwithstanding the observations made by the Hon'ble
Division Bench in the above appeal, filed by the State, the answer was in the
affirmative and therefore, it is evident that even after the said observations,
the department had chosen to approve the appointment of the said teacher.
For another question posed to the learned Special 13 Government Pleader, as
to whether the department had taken steps to redeploy the excess teachers,
as observed, the answer was in the negative. Thus in the absence of any
steps being taken by the department and when appointments of the writ
petitioners, are against sanctioned posts, in the respective schools and
considering the fact that the department itself, had chosen to approve the
appointment of one Mr.S.Austin Jeba Solomon, on its own, party respondent
in W.A.No.70 of 2012, wherein, the abovesaid observations were made, this
Court is of the view that the writ petitioners are entitled for approval of their
appointments, as Secondary Grade Teachers. At this juncture, it is also
worthwhile to consider the following decisions, as to whether a benefit
conferred to a similarly placed person can be denied or not, when facts are
similar.”
14.All the appointees with respect to these requisitions were appointed
on or after October 2015. The area of staff fixation and redeployment of
surplus staffs are governed by the mandates of G.O.Ms.No.525, School
Education D1 Department, dated 29.12.1997. The relevant portion of the
said G.O., is extracted as follows:-
“8. A fresh Assessment of grant for posts as per these orders shall be
18/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
done on the basis of average attendance. The staff strength shall be fixed
by the District Educational Officer concerned for High and Higher
Secondary Schools and by District Elementary Educational Officer in
respect of Elementary Middle Schools. Those who may be rendered
surplus due to application of these norms, shall, as far as possible be
redeployed to the needy Schools. The redeployment of staff in schools
shall be done by Director of School Education and Director of
Elementary Education or the Officers to be authorized by them. This
will be in super session of the orders issued in G.O.Ms.No.392, Education,
dated 24.6.1996. In cases where such deployment is felt difficult, the surplus
staff shall be allowed to continue in the same school till their retirement and
then the staff strength refixed as per norms. So also wherever necessary.
additional posts shall be sanctioned only after taking into account the number
of staff deployed to such schools. The Director of School Education and
Director of Elementary Education should report the additional posts to be
sanctioned as per the new norms after which formal permission in the first
year alone shall be granted by Government for filling up of the posts.
Subsequent fixation of staff strength shall be done by the District Elementary
Educational Officer in respect of Elementary and Middle Schools. Regarding
High and Higher Secondary schools, this shall be done by the Joint Directors
in the Education Department at the rate of 4 Revenue Districts per Joint
Director and permission from Government to fill up the posts is not
necessary.”
15.It is pretty clear from the mandates of G.O.Ms.No.525 that, staff
fixation as well as redeployment of surplus staffs shall be done by Director
19/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
of School Education and Director of Elementary Education or Officers
authorized by them. Thus, it could be understood that only the authorities
mentioned supra can redeploy surplus Teachers in the schools under the
same corporate management and the respective schools cannot redeploy the
surplus Teachers on its own. In the instant cases, all the proposals
forwarded to the authorities for approval of Teachers appointed in
sanctioned posts under the TDTA Corporate Management came to be
returned/rejected for the reason of non-exhaustion of surplus Teachers to
the needy schools.
16.The comprehensive reports submitted before this Court by the
Manager of TDTA Schools claim that after 2014 from the year 2015 to 2019,
neither staff fixation nor orders of redeployment were passed authorities
concerned. After 2014, only during 2019, the Chief Educational Officer in
Na.Ka.No.12248/E1/2018, dated 14.02.2019, directed the TDTA
Management to deploy the surplus Teachers on the basis of the staff fixation
for the respective schools and thereafter, duly the Management had
deployed the surplus Teachers on 19.02.2019 and the same has also been
approved by the authorities on receiving intimation in this regard.
17.Per contra, the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing
for the respondent authorities categorically contended that staff fixation was
made by the respective authorities from time to time during every academic
20/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
year refuting the claim of the TDTA Management. To substantiate his
argument, the learned Additional Government Pleader had also filed an
additional paper book dated 12.03.2024. The details of surplus Teachers of
TDTA Joint Management Schools produced by the respondent authorities do
not reflect the date of staff fixation as arrived by the respondent authorities.
That apart, the proceedings of the competent authorities directing the
Management to deploy the surplus Teachers during the academic years from
2015-2016 to 2018-2019 is also not produced. However, as contended by
the comprehensive report of the TDTA Corporate Management, the
respondent authorities have produced the proceedings of Chief Educational
Officer in Na.Ka.No.12248/E1/2018, dated nil.02.2019, signed on
14.02.2019, pertaining to the grant of permission to redeploy surplus staffs
in the schools run by TDTA Corporate Management. For better clarity, the
proceedings of the Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli, in Na.Ka.No.
12248/E1/2018, dated .02.2019, is extracted as follows:-
21/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
18.Though it is claimed in the aforesaid proceedings that the TDTA
Management has not filed any report with respect to redeployment on the
basis of the staff fixation, after the academic year 2012-2013, it can be
precisely understood from the various communications between the TDTA
Corporate Management and the respondent authorities that, order
permitting redeployment by the Corporate Management was not issued by
the Director of School Education/Director of Elementary Education/Officers
22/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
authorized by them during the academic years from 2014-2015 to
2018-2019.
19.It is pertinent to mention at this point that, the Hon'ble Division
Bench of this Court in the case reported in 2015 SCC Online Madras
14263, has categorically recorded the fact that during 2015, the
Department did not take any step to redeploy the excess Teachers in the
TDTA Management.
20.From the relevant records placed before me by the rival parties,
undoubtedly it has become clear that, the authorities have not taken any
steps to redeploy the excess Teachers even after 2015 till 2019 and only
pursuant to the proceedings of the Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli, in
Na.Ka.No.12248/E1/2018, dated 14.02.2019, steps to redeploy surplus
Teachers was taken by the respondent authorities in the TDTA Management
after 2013-2014. Pursuant to the proceedings in Na.Ka.No.12248/E1/2018,
dated 14.02.2019, the TDTA Management promptly complied with the
directions of the authorities by redeploying the surplus Teachers to the
needy schools under the said Corporate Management and duly submitted a
report and the same is extracted as follows:-
23/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
21.Following which, the Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli, vide
proceedings in Na.Ka.No.1335/E1/2018, dated 26.06.2019, approved the
redeployments effected by the TDTA Corporate Management and the same is
extracted as follows:-
24/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
25/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
22.Thereafter, even during the academic year 2022-2023 and
2023-2024, staff fixation was done, deployment orders received, following
which deployment effected and reported and approved by the authorities
concerned. As nearly as 493 Secondary Grade posts were surrendered
during the fixation process in the TDTA Management. The proceedings of
Tirunelveli District Educational Officer, Elementary, in Na.Ka.No.
597/Aa3/2022, dated 10.01.2024, Valliyur District Educational Officer,
(Elementary) in Na.Ka.No.2414/Aa1/2023, dated 23.01.2024 and the
Valliyur District Educational Officer, Elementary, in Na.Ka.No.
26/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
1130/a1/2023, dated 30.01.2024, directing the TDTA Management to
deploy the surplus Teachers in the education Districts of Tirunelveli,
Valliyur and Tenkasi, would reveal that the staff fixation has been carried
out by the education authorities not during the month of August and
September periodically but only at a later point, that is, even by the end of
the academic year or even after the academic year. It is needless to state
that the staff fixation was not done during the period from 2015 to 2018.
23.However, during the turbulent period of time from 2015 to 2021, a
sea change came into effect in the area of staff fixation, redeployment, etc,
more particularly with the administration of various private aided schools,
both minority and non-minority whose proposals for approval of teaching
faculty came to be rejected continuously by the authorities concerned for
several reasons, more particularly, on the ground that, no such appointment
could be made till the surplus staff identified or to be identified are
completely exhausted by redeployment of such surplus staff by the
Corporate Management. A batch of such cases came to be clubbed before
the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD)Nos.76 of 2019, 1461
of 2018, batch and was finally disposed of on 31.03.2021 ( 2021 SCC
Online Madras 1285) and the relevant portion of the same is extracted as
follows:-
“94. Conclusive Discussions :
94.1. If we have the over all view of the aforesaid factual matrix
27/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
and discussion made exhaustively on the core issues as well as
peripheral issues arisen in this batch of cases for decision, we can
divide the same in three broad categories. They are :
(i) Fixation of staff strength, identification and redeployment of
excess teachers to the needy schools, the mode of such activities and the
compendium of schedule for the same;
(ii) Right of the private aided institutions including the minority run
institutions to have both Tamil and English medium sections and the
right of the students to get free and compulsory education in both
mediums according to their choice and in that case, the necessity of
having enough or adequate staff strength based on the teacher-pupil
ratio and accordingly, the staff grant to be made by the State
Government for such Tamil / English medium sections, especially in the
context of the provisions of the RTE Act, i.e., from the academic year
2010-11; and
(iii) Till the comprehensive legislation, namely, Tamil Nadu Private
Schools (Regulation) Act, 2018 and the Rules to be made in this regard
comes into effect, whether a set of mandatory directions to be issued in
this batch of cases, including compendium of schedule, can stay for
utility.
94.2. Insofar as the first category of issue is concerned, we have
already discussed those issues at length and have expressed our view,
accordingly, the school shall be the unit and not the educational agency
for fixing the staff strength, based on which, every year, staff strength
based on the teacher-pupil ratio shall be fixed on or before a particular
date by the Educational authorities followed by identification of excess
teaching staff in every such school and once excess teaching staff are
identified, those excess staff shall be redeployed to needy school under
the same management or different managements, as the case may be. In
this context, a strict time schedule shall be followed, both by the
Education Department as well as the Institutions and its managements
and there shall be no deviation of such compendium of schedule, which
28/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
we propose to prescribe in this Order.
94.3. Insofar as the second category of issue is concerned,
no doubt, by virtue of Section 14A of the Tamil Nadu Private
Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973, the Institution / School which did
not get aid at the time of or immediately before the academic
year 1991-92 may not be entitled for such grant after 1991-92.
However if schools which were getting aid from the Government for
teaching and non-teaching staff either at the time of or just before the
commencement of the academic year 1991-92 shall continue to receive
the teaching aid subject to the fixation of staff strength in every
academic year. In those schools which are getting aid continuously even
beyond 1991-92, in case of any additional class or sections are opened,
on need basis, because of the enhancement of admissions in the school
concerned, even those additional standard or additional section shall not
be entitled to get teaching grant.
94.4. However, in respect of this category of schools who did
receive aid in 1991-92 and subsequently opened additional standard or
additional class and not received the aid by virtue of Section 14A of the
Act referred to above, those schools whether can continue to be in the
same status even beyond 2010-11 in view of the provisions of the RTE
Act?
94.5. In order to answer the said question, we answered in
favour of the schools in our discussions made in the earlier paras of this
order, accordingly, we deem it to hold that, the private aided schools
both minority and non-minority which were established and run with aid
either at the time or before commencement of academic year 1991-92,
though had not received aid for the additional standards or sections
opened subsequent to 1991-92, are entitled to get such aid for teaching
grant for such additional required staff for additional standard or class
opened in such school after the RTE Act came into effect, i.e., from
29/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
academic year 2010-11, for students of the age of 6 to 14 years only.
94.6. However, we are conscious of the effect of the aforesaid as
those Institutions may claim such teaching grant retrospectively from
2010-11. Therefore, we make it clear that, those Institutions shall not be
entitled to collect any arrear of staff grant for such additional staff for
the purpose of additional section or standard opened after 2010-11 in
an aided school as on 1991-92. However, they shall be entitled to get
such staff grant for additional staff for the purpose of additional class or
additional section only from the academic year 2021-22.
94.7. For the purpose of compendium of schedule to undertake
the exercise of fixing the staff strength based on the pupil strength in a
particular academic year, identification of excess staff and the process
of completing the redeployment of excess teacher to the needy school,
we propose to provide a compendium of schedule in the operative portion
of this order, which shall be strictly followed and adhered to until a
comprehensive rules to be framed in the 2018 Act referred to above
comes into force.
95. In view of the aforesaid discussions, we are inclined to pass
the following orders in this batch of cases :
"(a) For the purpose of fixing the students-teacher ratio, the
provisions of RTE Act followed by the G.O. passed in this regard shall be
taken as the basis and the student pupil ratio shall be either 1:30 or
1:35 as the case may be as per the provisions of RTE Act.
(b) For the purpose of fixing the staff strength of a school, school
shall be the unit and not the Educational agency / joint management /
corporate management.
(c) Once the staff strength is fixed in a particular academic year of
a school, it is the duty of the Educational authorities to identify the
excess staff and once the excess staff are identified, the same shall be
intimated to the school concerned as per the compendium of schedule
30/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
and thereafter, take steps to redeploy those excess staff to the needy
staff.
(d) Once the excess staff are identified and after keeping the
Institution intimated, if those excess staff are redeployed to the needy
school within a stipulated time as per the compendium of schedule, the
redeployed staff shall join duty in the redeployed school.
(e) The following compendium of schedule, for the aforesaid
purpose, i.e., for fixing the teaching staff, identifying the excess teaching
staff and to redeploy the identified excess teaching staff to the needy
school, are framed as hereunder.
(f) COMPENDIUM OF SCHEDULE :
(i) Closing of Admission for the purpose of fixation of staff
strength - 31st July of that academic year.
(ii) Fixation of staff strength of the school concerned, based
on the student strength as on 31st July as per the strength of the pupil
updated in the EMIS - 10th August.
(iii) The aforesaid fixation of staff strength of the school
shall be intimated to the school on or before 15th August.
(iv) On receipt of information from the Department, the
School concerned shall give its objection if any, based on the teacher-
pupil ratio on such fixation of staff strength by 25th of August.
(v) On receipt of such objection, if any, from the school
concerned, the final order of fixing the staff strength of the school, with
the provisional order for identification and redeployment of excess staff
shall be passed by the Department by 5th of September.
(vi) On receipt of such intimation of provisional order on
identification and redeployment of excess staff, the school under
corporate or joint management, shall act upon to give its consent to the
redeployment of excess teacher concerned after keeping the teacher
informed, to the Department, by 15th of September.
(vii) On receipt of such reply / intimation from the school
concerned, final redeployment order shall be made and communicated to
31/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
the school from where redeployment is made with a copy marked to the
teacher concerned and also to the needy school to which the deployment
is to be made, by 25th September.
(viii) On receipt of such orders by the teachers who are
redeployed, they shall report to the school where they have been
redeployed, on or before 30th September.
(ix) After making this redeployment process, still excess
staff are available, the Education Department shall take further effort,
and those excess teachers still available at the hands of the Education
Department to be redeployed to a needy school beyond the corporate
management concerned, i.e., to any school located in the same
Educational District or Revenue District and even beyond which if still
excess staff are available, they can be redeployed to any school beyond
the Revenue District of course after getting the choice of such teacher
concerned and that shall be completed by 10th October.
(x) Those teachers who got such redeployment within the
Revenue District or beyond the Revenue District by orders to be issued
on or before 10th of October, shall report duty to the School where they
have been redeployed on or before 15th of October.
(xi) It is made clear that beyond 15th October of every
academic year, no redeployment of teacher shall be made or given effect
to.
(g) Once the teachers are redeployed from a particular school,
after the joining time as provided under the compendium of schedule, the
school from which the teacher has been redeployed cannot get teaching
aid for the next month salary for that redeployed teacher and that salary
shall be paid only through the school, where the teacher has been
redeployed, for which, teaching grant shall be sent by the Educational
authorities only to the needy school, where the teacher has already been
redeployed.
(h) While identifying the excess staff for redeployment purpose as
32/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
indicated above, regard has to be given that as far as possible junior
most teacher shall be subjected to such redeployment. Also in case of
high and higher secondary schools, while making such redeployment
based on teacher-pupil ratio, regard has to be given to ensure that,
atleast the minimum required teacher, for each subject being taught in
the school, are in possession.
(i) Insofar as the teaching grant for the additional staff employed
in the already aided school as on the academic year 1991-92,
irrespective of the medium of instructions or irrespective of the students
strength, as per the teacher pupil ratio as indicated above especially in
the context of RTE Act and subsequent G.O issued in this regard, the
staff fixation shall be made and for those additional teaching staff, who
are pressed into service for additional standard or additional class
started, from the academic year 2021-22, staff grant shall be sanctioned
by the State Government as such sanctioning of staff grant will be the
essential requirement to meet the object of the provisions of the RTE Act,
otherwise, the Fundamental Right guaranteed to the children between
the age of 6 and 14 studying in those schools would get affected.
(j) Irrespective of the medium of instruction, whether Tamil or
English, such a staff grant for additional sections or standard shall be
provided with the same condition as indicated above from the academic
year 2021-22.
(k) The State Government shall ensure that, the provisions of the
Tamil Nadu Tamil Learning Act, 2006 are implemented in letter and
spirit, of course subject to the judicial orders / court orders, if any,
passed in this regard for giving exemption to a group or class of
students as provided under Section 5 of the said Act.
(l) Until the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2018 and
the Rules to be made thereunder are given effect to, these set of
33/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
directions issued in this order shall mandatorily be followed by the
stakeholders, i.e., both State Government as well as the Educational
Institutions.
(m) Once the 2018 Act and the Rules to be made in this regard
comes into effect and the issues which are covered under this order as
per these mandatory directions are taken care, these mandatory
directions shall be ceased to be in execution.
(n) In order to give effect to such comprehensive legislation, i.e.,
2018 Act, the work of framing necessary Rules under the Act shall be
completed as early as possible.
(o) In view of the aforesaid, the G.O.Ms.No.165, School Education
[Tho.Ka.2(1)] Department, dated 17.09.2019 is hereby declared to be
inoperative.
(p) In view of the statistics given by the communication of the
Director of School Education and Director of Elementary Education,
dated 28.10.2020, as the import of the same in entirety has already
been quoted herein above, the Education Department shall take
endeavour to identify the exact excess teaching staff in various category
of Schools, i.e., Government schools (Panchayat Union, Municipality and
Corporation) Primary and Middle Schools, Government aided primary
and middle schools, Government High and Higher secondary schools
and aided High and Higher Secondary Schools separately by taking into
account the recent policy decision taken by the State Government,
whereby the superannuation age of the Government servants including
the teachers was enhanced from 59 to 60, thereby there would be no
superannuation of teachers for the next one year and accordingly, the
correct statistics shall be made ready within a period of two months.
(q) Once the statistics of excess teaching staff under various
category of schools as referred to above are made by taking into account
34/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
the superannuation age of teachers as 60, such excess teaching staff
identified in various category of schools with details of name of the
school both Government as well as Private aided, shall be uploaded in
the website / web portal of the School Education Department within the
aforestated period of two months.
(r) Once such information are uploaded in the web portal by the
Education Department, after verifying the same, the private aided
schools, both minority and non-minority can point out any wrong
information if given with regard to the identification of the excess
teaching staff in the concerned school and such intimation or clarification
can be given by the school concerned through the management to the
DEO / CEO concerned within a period of one month thereafter.
(s) On receipt of such objections, information / clarification from
the school concerned with regard to the alleged wrong information
provided by the State Government / Education Department in the web
portal as indicated above, the same shall be verified and rectified by the
Education Department, within one month thereafter.
(t) This exercise shall be completed on or before 31st July 2021,
so that the identification of excess staff and follow up action as
indicated in the compendium of schedule herein above can be
undertaken and be followed strictly.
(u) Till such excess teaching staff are identified under all category
of schools as indicated above, no recruitment shall be made by the State
Government / Education Department for the purpose of appointment of
teachers under various categories like Secondary grade teacher,
Graduate teacher, Post-Graduate teacher, Language teacher, Physical
education teacher etc.,
(v) Like that insofar as aided minority institutions are concerned,if
35/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
it is a stand alone institution, their right of appointing a teacher in a
vacancy within the sanctioned strength for the academic year 2021-22
shall not be affected because of the identified excess teachers in other
schools. At the same time, even if the school is a minority institution,
however being administered by a joint management or corporate
management, in respect of those schools, even though vacancy arose
within the sanctioned strength of such school or schools under corporate
management or joint management, those vacancies shall not be filled up
unless the excess staff identified in all other schools under the same
corporate or joint management are exhausted fully and only after
exhausting the redeployment process on all excess teachers identified in
the group of schools under the same corporate management, they shall
be free to make appointment afresh from open market in the vacancy if
any still, within the sanctioned strength.”
24.The compendium of schedule in the aforesaid Iruthaya Amali's case
has mandated the following obligations to be followed by the schools,
Corporate Management and the educational authorities:-
Date Corporate Management/School
Management concerned
Education Dept
10
th
August Fixation of staff strength
of school concerned
15
th
August Intimation of staff
strength to the respective
schools
25
th
August Schools to submit objections, if
any, to staff fixation
5
th
September Final order of staff fixation
with provisional order for
identification and re-
deployment of excess staff
to be issued
36/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
15
th
September School under corporate
management to give consent to
the provisional order dated 5th
September of every academic year
25
th
September Final redeployment order
to be made
30
th
September Redeployment to be effected to
the respective schools
10
th
October If still, excess staff are
available excess teachers
to be redeployed beyond
corporate management to
any school located in the
same Educational District
or Revenue District and
even beyond if still excess
staffs are available.
15
th
October Redeployment to be effected. No
redeployment of teacher shall be
made or given effect to, beyond
15
th
October.
25.However, in the instant case, during the academic year 2018-2019,
final redeployment order was issued by the authorities concerned on
14.02.2019. During the academic year 2023-2024, Tirunelveli District
Educational Officer (Elementary) issued final redeployment order on
10.01.2024, Valliyur District Educational Officer (Elementary) issued final
redeployment order on 23.01.2024 and Valliyur District Educational Officer
(Elementary) issued final redeployment order on 30.01.2024 with respect to
the redeployment of surplus teachers in the education Districts of
Tirunelveli, Valliyur and Tenkasi respectively. For the academic years from
2015-2018, the final redeployment orders were not at all issued by the
authorities concerned, with respect to the TDTA management is concerned.
37/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
While being so, the department had referred a Special Leave Appeal which
was pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court as against the judgment of the
Division Bench in the batch of petitions in W.A.(MD)No.76 of 2009, batch, in
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).15702 of 2021. The said SLP
was disposed on 16.02.2024 and the relevant portion of the same is
extracted as follows:-
“2.The counsel would refer to this Court's proceedings
dated 27.09.2023 and the earlier proceeding dated 10.08.2022 to
point out that following the liberty granted in Clause (m) of
Paragraph 95 in the impugned judgment dated 31.03.2021, the
Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2018 and Rules were
enacted w.e.f. 20.01.2023. Thus the enacted laws will govern the
process of approval for teachers in the concerned schools
provided the individual and the school concerned satisfy the
criteria laid down in the 2023 Regulations.
3.However, the above 2023 Regulations and the Rules are
subject matter of challenge before the Madras High Court and an
interim order was passed therein on 21.04.2023, ordering status
quo on the operation of the 2023 Regulations.
4.The suggestion made by the two senior counsel to this
Court is to relegate the parties to the pending proceedings in the
Madras High Court. It is however submitted that the Division
Bench should limit itself to the core direction given in sub-clause (i)
of paragraph 95 of the impugned judgment dated 31.03.2021 in
the Writ Appeal (MD) No. 76 of 2019 and need not be concerned
with the other aspects in the earlier judgment (31.3.2021).
5.Accepting the above submission, this matter is ordered
to be closed by relegating the parties to the Madras High Court. It
is made clear that the Court should decide the pending matter on
38/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
merit without being influenced by any observation made by this
Court during the pendency of the present proceeding or under the
impugned order.”
26.A careful reading of the order of the Hon'ble Apex Court in
S.L.P.Civil No.15702 of 2021 dated 16.02.2024, would reveal that the
judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the batch of Writ
Petitions in W.A.(MD)No.76 of 2019 has attained finality, except as to the
Clause (i) in paragraph 95 of the aforesaid judgment dated 31.03.2021,
which was relegated back to the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court for
reconsideration.
27.The Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD)No.1557 of
2023 in the case of the State of Tamil Nadu represented by its Principal
Secretary, Department of School Education, Chennai and others
versus C.Essaki Muthu and another, by its judgment dated 21.09.2023,
has held that the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench in W.A.(MD)No.76
of 2019, batch dated 31.03.2021, is prospective in nature and the relevant
portion of the same is extracted as follows:-
“11. There is no quarrel over the proposition that the questions
as to whether the school should be taken as a unit or the
educational agency as such should be taken as the unit for
determining the surplus teachers and whether if the surplus
teachers are available in the district, appointments can be made,
have been considered in detail by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this
39/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
Court in Iruthaya Amali's case. It is also not in dispute that after
detailed consideration of the issue, the Hon'ble Division Bench of
this Court has held that only the concerned school alone and not the
education agency should be taken as a unit while determining the
surplus and that until the surplus teachers available in the district
are redeployed, no appointment can be made by the aided schools.
The said judgment came to be delivered on 31.03.2021.
12. It cannot also be disputed that any judgment is
retrospective unless it is rendered prospective. Useful reference can
be made in this regard to the Judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme
Court of India in Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Rajkot -Vs-
Saurashtra Kutch Stock Exchange Limited5 to paragraphs 35 -37.
15. Because of the above position, even though an interim order was
granted on 10.04.2019 pending the above decision not to approve
the appointments, the Division Bench had not negated or stated
anything about the fate of those appointments of which approvals
were pending. It is to be seen that the earlier interim order given by
another Coordinate Bench was also nullified and the G.O.Ms.No.165
which was issued pursuant to the earlier order was also expressly
declared to be inoperative.
16. The Hon-ble Division Bench was consciously did not
nullify the appointments made earlier since it establishes a new
norm to prevent administrative chaos and even directs framing of
rules and it is not a simple case of upturning an earlier decision or
ruling, by which it can be applied retrospectively to all pending
cases. The findings of the Division Bench and the directions given
depend on each other and without following the compendium of
schedule, information of the school, etc, in isolation, the appointment
which was made even prior to the interim order by the Hon-ble
Division bench cannot be construed as having been affected by the
judgment in Iruthaya Amali-s case.
40/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
17. More so, whether the appointment which is made pursuant
to an express permission can be refused approval or not was also
not an issue in Irudaya Amali-s case and thus would result in a
great hardship and undue prejudice by applying the ratio to the a
case where the appointment itself was made after express
permission. Accordingly, we hold that the appointment of the writ
petitioner cannot be refused citing the directions given in Iruthaya
Amali-s case. As a matter of fact even in the impugned order, the
appellants/respondents were not clear as to whether Iruthaya
Amali-s case is applicable or not and that in view of the
pronouncement since the Government has not come clear with the
clarification they are not approving. Further, it can be seen that there
was no redeployment of any teacher at all to the second respondent
school and on the contrary, the appellants gave express permission
for the second respondent school to fill up the vacancy.
18. The impossibility of retrospective or retro active application
of directions in a Judgment has been considered by the Hon-ble
Supreme Court of India in Goan Real Estate Construction Limited
and Another ~Vs~ Union of India and it is specifically held in
paragraph 31 that the Judgment should be read in the context and
its entirety and the observations should not be applied out of
context. In paragraph 39 it is held that the nature of directions
should be considered to give prospective effect. In paragraph 34 it is
held that whenever a new norm is established the ability to
retrospectively effectuate the new rule should be considered. Thus,
applying the dictum, it can be seen that the Division Bench had
consciously did not nullify the appointments pending approval.”
28.In another batch of cases in W.P.No.3194 of 2020, 3437 and 3439
of 2020, batch, this Court, by its order dated 18.04.2022, held that the
41/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, in batch of Writ
Appeals in W.A.(MD)No.76 of 2019, etc, is prospective and the relevant
portion of the same is extracted as follows:-
“8. According to the learned Additional Advocate General, the
State Government has preferred an appeal before the Hon-ble
Supreme Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.15702 of 2021 as
against the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this Court in
the Batch of Writ Appeals in W.A.(MD) No.76 of 2019, etc. and
obtained stay in sofar as Clause (i) of paragraph 95 of the said
judgment. Except the aforesaid clause (i) of paragraph 95, there was
no stay in respect of remaining portion of the judgment. It is agreed
by the learned Additional Advocate General that the writ petitioners
were appointed prior to the G.O.Ms.No.165 dated 17.9.2019 and
therefore, it can be considered and an appropriate order may be
passed.
9. On perusal of the judgment of the Division Bench of this
Court in the aforesaid Batch of cases and also the G.O.Ms.No.165
issued by the School Education Department, dated 17.9.2019, both
the judgment as well as G.O.Ms.No.165 are prospective in nature.
The appointments made by the School Management in the instant
writ petitions are prior to the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.165 dated
17.9.2019 and proposals for the said appointment were also
forwarded to the educational authorities prior to the issuance of
G.O.Ms.No.165 dated 17.9.2019. Therefore, there is no legal
impediments for the respondents to accord approval to the
appointment made by the School Management in the instant writ
petitions.
10. Having regard to the rival submissions of the parties,
taking note of the judgment passed by the Division Bench of this
Court in a Batch of Writ Appeals in W.A.(MD) No.76 of 2019, etc.,
42/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
G.O.Ms.No.165 issued by the School Education department, dated
17.9.2019 will not prohibit the educational authorities to approve the
appointment made by the School Management in the instant writ
petitions since the proposals for approval of appointment made by
the School Management were forwarded to the educational
authorities prior to the issuance of G.O.Ms.No.165 dated 17.9.2019.
Therefore, this Court is of the view that the respondent department
without considering the G.O.Ms.No.165 dated 17.9.2019 in proper
perspective and passed the impugned order rejecting the proposals
submitted by the School Management. Therefore, the impugned
orders passed by the respondent department are liable to be
quashed.
11. Accordingly, the impugned orders passed by the
respondent department in the aforesaid writ petitions are quashed
and remitted to the Chief Educational Officers/District Educational
Officers concerned, to consider and pass an order of approval of the
appointment made by the School management, provided the said
proposals satisfies all the norms prescribed for such appointments
and as per the Rules, as expeditiously as possible preferably within
a period of 12 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order.”
29.It is pertinent to mention here that the Government did not prefer
any Appeal as against the order of the learned Single Judge, who passed the
order in W.P.No.3194 of 2020, batch and hence, the said proposition that
the judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD)No.76
of 2019, batch, is prospective in nature, has become final.
30.Coming back to the instant case, respectfully fortified by the
43/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
decisions of this Court in the judgments extracted supra, considering the
fact that the Hon'ble Division Bench consciously did not nullify the
appointments made earlier to the judgment, dated 31.03.2021 and taking
into consideration that the authorities concerned failed to issue deployment
orders in terms of G.O.Ms.No.525, School Education Department, during
the academic years 2015 to 2018, with respect to the schools run by the
TDTA corporate management, since all the appointments pertaining to each
and every Writ Petition before me are the appointments, which are made by
the corporate management in the sanctioned vacancies of the respective
schools, I have no hesitation to hold that the appointments of each and
every petitioner herein, who are appointed before 31.03.2021 will not be
affected either by the mandates of G.O.Ms.No.165, School Education
Department dated 17.09.2019 or the judgment of the Honourable Division
Bench in Iruthaya Amali's case.
31.In view of the same, I am of the considered view that the
respondent authorities are at the obligation to approve all the appointments
with respect to those petitioners who were appointed prior to 31.03.2021
forthwith from the date of their appointment within a period of four weeks
from the date of receipt of copy of this order. As far as the appointments
made after 31.03.2021, the same has to be dealt with separately taking into
consideration the directions in the compendium of schedule in the batch of
Writ Petitions in W.A.(MD)No.76 of 2019 dated 31.03.2021.
44/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
Epilogue:-
32.This batch of 30 Writ Petitions pertain to the Corporate
Management, namely, Tinnelvelly Diocese Trust Association. The Hon'ble
Division Bench of this Court in a batch of Writ Appeals in W.A.(MD)Nos.639
and 640 of 2015, batch, reported in 2015 SCC Online Madras 14263, in
paragraph 5 of the aforesaid judgment had observed that 247 primary
schools and 73 middle schools were run by the Corporate Management,
namely, TDTA. Therefore, it could be understood that as on the date of the
aforesaid judgment on 17.06.2015, the said Corporate Management,
namely, TDTA had under its umbrella, a total number of 320 schools. The
proceedings of the Chief Educational Officer, dated 26.06.2019, would reveal
that as on 26.06.2019, there are 323 schools, that is, 249 primary schools
and 74 middle schools under the TDTA Corporate Management. Thus, it can
be understood that in between 2015 and 2019, the respondent authorities
have granted recognition to two additional new primary schools and one
additional middle school to the TDTA Corporate Management. Para no.94.3
of Iruthaya Amali's case is extracted again as follows:-
“94.3. Insofar as the second category of issue is concerned,
no doubt, by virtue of Section 14A of the Tamil Nadu Private
Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973, the Institution / School which did
not get aid at the time of or immediately before the academic
year 1991-92 may not be entitled for such grant after 1991-92.
However if schools which were getting aid from the Government for
teaching and non-teaching staff either at the time of or just before the
45/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
commencement of the academic year 1991-92 shall continue to receive
the teaching aid subject to the fixation of staff strength in every
academic year. In those schools which are getting aid continuously even
beyond 1991-92, in case of any additional class or sections are opened,
on need basis, because of the enhancement of admissions in the school
concerned, even those additional standard or additional section shall not
be entitled to get teaching grant.”
33.The sanction of teaching grant/sanction of additional post/staff
fixation are carried out by the respondent authorities only in terms of the
mandates of G.O.Ms.No.525, School Education (D1) Department, dated
29.12.1997, since issuance of the aforesaid Government Order. At this
point, it is interesting to understand that when the Government had made
its intentions clear that it is difficult for the Government to support the
newly established schools due to budgetary/financial constraints since
1980, in the aforesaid Government Order and has in fact barred grant-in-aid
for new schools after the academic year 1991-1992, it is ridiculous as to
how the respondent authorities granted recognition to two new primary
schools and one middle school run/administered under the TDTA
Management, after 2015.
34.Coming to the lis in hand, among the 30 cases, 22 writ petitioners
are appointed between 2015 and 2019. From the various proceedings of the
respondent authorities placed before me, it could be understood that post
2013-2014, though the Corporate Management, namely, TDTA, claim that
46/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
the respondent authorities have neither issued orders of staff fixation nor
orders of deployment of surplus teachers, the counsel for the respondent
authorities have placed before me, the details of surplus teachers working in
the various schools under the TDTA Management for the academic years
from 2011-2012 to 2023-2024. The Corporate Management however defies
the same by contending that the aforesaid list of surplus teachers were not
served upon them. But the records placed before me by the rival parties
would make it clear that, after 2013-2014, till 2019 deployment orders were
never ever passed by the respondent authorities. It is a mandate of the
Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.525 that both the staff fixation as well as
the redeployment of staff in schools shall be done only by the District
Educational Officer in respect of elementary-middle school or the officers
authorized by them. Unless and until staff fixation orders and deployment
orders are passed by the officers concerned, the schools/Corporate
Management cannot effect redeployment of surplus teachers even if
identified. Remaining idle without serving the staff fixation orders on the
Corporate Management/respective schools and without issuing deployment
orders from time to time for every academic year, the respondent authorities
have facilitated the various petitioners before me to file all these Writ
Petitions by either returning or rejecting their proposals seeking approval of
their appointment in the respective schools under the TDTA management. It
can be seen that the Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli, vide proceedings
in Na.Ka.No.12248/E1/2018, dated 14.02.2019, directed the TDTA
47/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
Management to deploy the surplus Teachers and duly the Management had
deployed the surplus teachers on 19.02.2019, which was later, vide
proceedings in Na.Ka.No.1335/E1/2018, dated 26.06.2019, passed by the
Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli, came to be approved. Interestingly, it
is only in this proceeding of the Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli, in
Na.Ka.No.1335/E1/2018, dated 26.06.2019, approving the deployment
effected by the Management the information as to the total number of
primary/middle schools functioning under the TDTA Management is found.
That apart, evasively the aforesaid Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli,
had stated that after 2012-2013, the TDTA Management had not deployed
the surplus teachers in terms of the staff fixation made by the respondent
authorities till the academic year 2017-2018 and thereafter, only for the
during the academic year 2018-2019, based on the staff fixation
deployments came to be effected.
35.Conveniently in the aforesaid proceedings, the Chief Educational
Officer had failed to mention that only because deployment orders were not
passed by the competent authorities, the TDTA management was unable to
deploy their surplus Teachers to the various schools under the said
management. Even thereafter for the academic years 2019-2020, 2020-2021
and 2021-2022, the deployment orders were not passed by the competent
authorities. Later, only during the academic year 2023-2024, the staff
fixation as well as deployment orders were passed and duly the TDTA
48/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
Management has also effected deployment in terms of the direction of the
authorities. However, the orders as to grant of approval for deployment for
the academic year 2022-2023 has not been passed by the authorities so far.
It is only under these circumstances various proposal seeking approval of
appointment came to be returned and rejected by the respondent authorities
giving way to all the petitioners herein to knock the doors of this Court
seeking justice. Except the writ petitioner in W.P.(MD)No.165 of 2024, all the
other writ petitioners were appointed before the judgment of the Hon'ble
Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD)No.76 of 2019 dated 31.03.2021, in
which a compendium of schedule with directions to the respondent
authorities with respect to staff fixation as well as deployment came to be
made by this Court.
36.As elaborately discussed supra, the aforesaid judgment is only
prospective in nature. That apart, the Hon'ble Division Bench consciously
did not nullify the appointments made earlier to the aforesaid judgment.
There can be no quarrel as to the fact that approval to appointments made
against sanctioned posts cannot be denied merely because of the fact that
certain posts are available and certain surplus posts are available in the
other schools under the same management. The respondent authorities
having willfully failed to pass orders of staff fixations and the orders of
deployment in terms of G.O.Ms.No.525, dated 29.12.1997, during the period
from 2015 to 2022, in that case, this Court is left with no other option
49/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
rather allowing all these Writ Petitions, in the background of the fact that all
the writ petitioners are appointed only in sanctioned vacancies respectively.
W.P.(MD)No.165 of 2024:-
37.The petitioner is working as a Secondary Grade Teacher in the
fourth respondent School which is managed by the TDTA Corporate
Management. One post of Secondary Grade Teacher in the fourth
respondent School fell vacant due to the retirement of the previous
incumbent Mrs. Jhansi Rani on 28.02.2023. In the said vacancy, the
petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher with effect from
12.04.2023. The petitioner is fully qualified for the post and she possessed
D.T.Ed and also qualified in TET qualification. The School submitted the
proposal to the second respondent through the third respondent on
07.10.2023, requiring to approve her appointment as Secondary Grade
Teacher with effect from 12.04.2023. The third respondent returned the
proposal vide proceedings in O.Mu.No.1168/A2/2023, dated 14.11.2023, for
the reason that the proposal shall be considered only after the issuance of
guidelines by the first respondent with regard to the approval of the
Secondary Grade Teacher. Challenging the same, this Writ Petition came to
be filed.
38.No doubt, the appointment of the petitioner came to be effected on
12.04.2023, i.e., after the date of judgment in Iruthaya Amali's case in W.A.
50/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
(MD)NO.76 of 2016, batch dated 31.03.2021. The directions issued in para
no.95 under compendium of schedule in the aforesaid judgment has been
tested before the Hon'ble Apex Court in Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).
15702 of 2021, dated 16.02.2024 and the judgment passed by the Hon'ble
Division Bench of this Court in Iruthaya Amali and the directions in para no.
95 except para no.95(i) has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court and
has attained finality.
39.The instant lis is not in connection to para no.95(i) of the Iruthaya
Amali's case. Since the matter is all about the approval of the appointment
of the petitioner made after the date of judgment in Iruthaya Amali, the same
has to be dealt with in terms of the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in
Iruthaya Amali. The Compendium of Schedule in para no.95 of Iruthaya
Amali's case mandates that the authorities concerned should conclude the
staff fixation of the Corporate Management by 10
th
August of every academic
year and by 15
th
August, the intimation of the staff strength be given to the
respective schools. The schools are expected to submit their objections, if
any to staff fixation on or before 25
th
August. Based on the same, by 5
th
August of every academic year, final order of staff fixation with provisional
order for identification and redeployment of surplus staffs are to be issued
by the Education Department. By 15
th
September, the school under the
Corporate Management should give consent to the provisional order dated
5
th
September of every academic year. On the basis of the same by 25
th
51/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
September, final redeployment order should be made by the Education
Department. The respective schools should comply the final redeployment
by 30
th
September.
40.In the instant case, the appointment of the petitioner was made on
12.04.2023, the proposal seeking appointment of the petitioner was
forwarded on 07.10.2023 to the second respondent through the third
respondent. The Corporate Management has filed a report dated
18.03.2024, before this Court.
41.A careful perusal of the materials available on record including the
various proceedings before me by respondent authorities, it could be
understood that the petitioner came to be appointed during the academic
year 2022 - 2023. The District Educational Officer (Elementary), Tirunelveli,
vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.0087/Aa3/2022, dated 16.03.2023, on the
basis of staff fixation passed the order of deployment and communicated the
same to the Manager of TDTA Corporate Management. Following which, on
10.04.2023, TDTA Corporate Management had relieved the surplus Teachers
from the respective Schools under the said Corporate Management in terms
of the deployment order passed by the District Educational Officer
(Elementary), dated 16.03.2023. Thereafter, the deployed Teachers joined
service in the respective schools to which they were deployed in the forenoon
of 11.04.2023, thereby, completing the process of deployment within the
52/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
Corporate Management. After exhausting the surplus Teachers. the same
was communicated by the Corporate Management to the Educational
authorities on 11.04.2023. However, even after the submission of the
redeployment details effected by the Corporate Management on 11.04.2023,
the same was not verified and approved by the Educational Authorities. It
can be understood that only after completely deploying the Teachers in
terms of the order of the District Educational Officer (Elementary) on
16.03.2023, the petitioner came to be appointed in the fourth respondent
School on 12.04.2023. Once the redeployment has been completed by the
Corporate Management, it is the bounden duty of the Officers concerned to
verify the same and approve with immediate effect. In the instant case, the
said exercise has not been done by the second respondent. In view of the
same, the impugned order is hereby quashed and consequently the second
respondent is directed to verify the intimation submitted by TDTA Corporate
Management on 11.04.2024 and if the same is found in order, approve the
appointment of the petitioner within a period of four weeks from the date of
receipt of copy of this order.
53/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
42.In view of the above, the Writ Petitions are allowed. There shall be
no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are
closed.
11.09.2024
NCC : Yes / No
Index :Yes / No
Internet:Yes
Mrn
To
1.The Secretary to Government,
School Education Department, Chennai.
2.The Director of Elementary School Education,
D.P.I. Compound,
College Road, Chennai.
3.The District Educational Officer (Elementary),
Tenkasi District,
Tenkasi.
4.The Block Educational Officer,
Kuruvukilam Range,
Tenkasi District.
5.The Correspondent,
TDTA V.M.Middle School,
Vagaikulam,
Tenkasi District.
6.The Chief Educational Officer,
Tirunelveli District.
7.The Chief Educational Officer,
Tenkasi District.
54/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD)No.25280 of 2023, batch
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
Mrn
W.P.(MD)Nos.25280, 25285, 25286, 25287, 25288, 25281, 25282,
25283, 25284 of 2023, 165, 197, 657, 713, 715, 716, 714, 1878, 3477,
3712, 3715, 3716, 3717, 3718, 5782, 3713, 3714, 3735, 5528, 5623
and 5760 of 2024
11.09.2024
55/55 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Legal Notes
Add a Note....