LAWS(MAD)-2020-9-458

C.AZHAGARASAN Vs. DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION

Decided On September 15, 2020
C.Azhagarasan Appellant
V/S
DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is the case of the petitioner that he was appointed as Secondary Grade Assistant by the District Elementary Education Officer, Dhamapuri in September, 1999. Though the declaration of probation ought to have been made in two years, however, a delay of one year and two months was envisioned in the declaration of his probation, which was done on 6.11.02, which resulted in unduly delaying the promotion of the petitioner. It is the further case of the petitioner that the 4th respondent, who was appointed much after the petitioner on 17.11.1999, his probation was declared on time and was given temporary promotion on 18.6.02 and regular promotion was also given to him. However, the promotion of the petitioner was delayed unduly for no fault of his, for which the petitioner submitted representation to which vide communication dated 30.11.12, the petitioner was informed that if any of his juniors are promoted the case of the petitioner would be considered. Since the 4th respondent, who is junior to him, was promoted, the petitioner submitted a representation on 21.11.2012, which did not evoke any response, which has prompted the petitioner to file the present petition.

(2.) Though the matter has been repeatedly adjourned, there is no representation for the petitioner. Considering the fact that the matter pertains to the year 2013 and relating to promotion and counter has also been filed by the respondents way back, this Court is proceeding to decide the case on merits.

(3.) A perusal of the counter reveals that there were many backlog vacancies in the scheduled caste category for want of persons with Diploma in Teacher Education and, therefore, a policy decision was taken by the Government which resulted in issuance of G.O. Ms. No.423/Education dated 3.10.1997, which permitted that the said backlog vacancies could be filled up with scheduled caste candidates, who have qualified themselves in B.Ed., on condition that they should not claim incentive increments for higher educational qualifications and they also should not claim any preference for further promotion. In pursuance to the said Government Order, after obtaining declarations from persons, who were holding B.Ed. Degree, they were appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher. In essence, the petitioner was not in possession of the requisite qualifications, but only was given appointment by relaxation of the rule provisions with conditions attached thereto. It is also further averred that a writ petition in W.P. No.16967/97 pending in the High Court as also his appointment on relaxation of conditions, resulted in the delay in regularising his services and declaring his probation.