P JAYARANI Vs. DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed for quashing the order dated 27.7.2001 passed by the second respondent wherein the second respondent had disposed the order relating to promotion of the petitioner as headmistress and has directed for promotion of the sixth respondent as headmistress.

(2.) The facts giving rise to present the writ petition are as follows:- Sri T.K.D. Girls Higher Secondary School, Courtallam in Nellai District is a private aided school and is governed by the Tamilnadu Private Schools Regulation Act. A vacancy in the post of Headmaster arose on 31.5.1995 due to retirement of the incumbent and the present sixth respondent was allowed to continue as the incharge Headmistress. Subsequently, the School Committee conducted a regular selection and held an interview for the purpose and thereafter selected the present petitioner for the post of Headmistress. A proposal was sent to the District Educational Officer for approval. Since the District Educational Officer did not pass any orders, the petitioner had filed W.P.No.9395 of 1997 which was disposed on 29.6.1997 with a direction to the District Educational Officer to consider the proposal. Subsequently by an order dated 31.7.1997, the District Educational Officer refused to grant approval. The petitioner filed appeal before the Joint Director (Higher Secondary), who rejected the appeal. The aforesaid order was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.No.10516 of 1998. In the meantime, the sixth respondent had also filed W.P.No.6663 of 1997 against the order promoting the present petitioner-headmistress and she had also filed W.P.No.17041 of 1995 seeking to quash the memorandum of charges levelled against her. Against the interim order passed in the latter writ petition, the management had filed Writ Appeal No.411 of 1996 and the present petitioner had filed Writ Appeal No.1543 of 1999 against the order refusing to grant interim stay in the writ petition filed by her. The various Writ Appeals were disposed on 30.1.2001, wherein the Division Bench observed that the Appellate Authority should consider the question of selection of the present petitioner and non-selection of the present sixth respondent and thereafter the Education Department is to consider the question of granting or refusing the approval. The Appellate Authority after going through the proceedings of the Selection Committee, disapproved the proposal to appoint the petitioner as Headmistress and on the other hand, directed that the sixth respondent should be appointed as the Headmistress. The Appellate Authority has observed that the merit of the present petitioner and the sixth respondent appear to be more or less the same and the sixth respondent being senior should have been promoted, keeping in view of the provisions contained in Rule 15(4) of the Tamilnadu Private Schools Regulation Rules.

(3.) There is no dispute that selection of Headmistress is to be made on the basis of merit, but if merit is found to be equal then the teacher, who is senior, is to be appointed as per Rule 15(4).