LAWS(MAD)-2012-2-381

S VIMALRAJ Vs. ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT SCHOOL EDUCATION C2 DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT CHENNAI

Decided On February 01, 2012
S. VIMALRAJ Appellant
V/S
ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SCHOOL EDUCATION (C2) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, CHENNAI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to challenge the Rule 10-A(a) of the Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Service Rules insofar as it restricts the recruitment only by calling for names from the employment exchange is ultra vires, unconstitutional and hit by Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution and for a consequential direction to the respondents to recruit the secondary grade teachers by inviting applications from all the eligible candidates through advertisements in the newspapers having wider circulation.

(2.) IT is seen from the records that the petitioners originally got admitted to the unrecognised teacher training institute in the year 1993 and finally, through the concession given by the Government got into the recognised teacher training institute. They have passed their diploma during the year 2008. They have also got their names registered in the employment exchange. But, however aggrieved by the notification issued by the Teacher Recruitment Board for calling for applications in respect of 1394 posts of secondary grade teachers, the petitioners have rushed to this court. In that advertisements dated 09.11.2011, in paragraph 10, it was stated that the selection will be made based on communal reservation and the date of registration in the employment exchange and that seniority of registration will be considered strictly. According to the petitioner, this is based upon Rule 10-A(a), wherein and by which eligible candidates are called only from the employment exchange. The petitioners wanted all candidates' names to be considered. For that, he seeks for a direction also to give advertisement in the newspapers and to that extent, the rule restricted the authority from considering the qualified persons. Hence the rule is ultra vires.

(3.) THE State Government pursuant to the direction issued by the Supreme Court had issued a consequential Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.181, School Education Department, dated 15.11.2011. In paragraphs 5 and 7 of the order, it was stated as follows: