P. SANGEETHA Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final disposal.

(2.) The petitioner herein was appointed as a B.T. Assistant in the 6th respondent School on 01.09.2010 in the vacancy that arose due to promotion of an erstwhile teacher. It is stated that the petitioner was thereafter employed with the 7th respondent School, where she is now working as a B.T. Assistant. The appointment of the petitioner was approved by the District Educational Officer, Chennai, who is the 5th respondent herein, through proceedings dated 26.09.2014, approving the petitioner's appointment with effect from 07.09.2010. By the impugned order dated 26.09.2014, the 5th respondent herein had taken into consideration the objections of the Director of School Education and stated that the petitioner herein, since has not qualified herself in the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), would not be entitled for the annual increments and other additional allowances and therefore has directed for recovery of these monetary benefits. Aggrieved against the same, the present writ petition has been filed.

(3.) The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the issue involved in the present writ petition has been considered by an Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court, which was subsequently followed in other cases also, including the case in R.Kumar and another Vs. State of Tamil Nadu, Department of School Education in W.R (MD) Nos.8168 and 8169 of 2017 dated 23.09.2019. It is his further submission that the National Counsel of Teacher Education (NCTE) has also amended the minimum qualification for these teachers, through a notification dated 29.07.2011, by which, it is clarified that the teachers appointed, prior to the date of this notification, need not qualify themselves with the TET Examination.