R. VELLAICHAMY Vs. CHIEF ELEMENTARY EDUCATIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is aggrieved against the order passed by the first respondent, dated 19.03.2008 and consequently seeking for approval of the petitioner's appointment as 'Headmaster' from 01.06.1996 and to pay the arrears, increments and other monetary and attendants benefits.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as 'Secondary Grade Teacher' in the second respondent School on 08.10.1973. He was promoted as 'Headmaster' on 01.06.1996. Another teacher, by name Arjunan challenged the appointment of the petitioner as 'Headmaster' before the first respondent. Consequently, approval sought for the petitioner's appointment from 01.06.1996 was rejected and the said Arjunan was directed to be appointed as Headmaster of the School, through an order, dated 07.03.1997, passed by the District Elementary Educational Officer, Virudhunagar. Aggrieved against the said order, the second respondent School filed a writ petition in W.P.No.14626 of 1997 and the same was dismissed on 04.12.1998. Further, writ appeal was preferred in W.A.No.412 of 1999 by the second respondent School. The Hon'ble Division Bench of this court, by its order, dated 26.06.2000 set aside the order of appointment of the petitioner as 'Headmaster' and directed the School to make a fresh selection between the petitioner and the said Arjunan, by specifically observing that the petitioner's father should not participate in the proceedings of the Selection Committee. Thereafter, the School Committee recommended the petitioner's appointment from the date of his initial appointment, namely 01.06.1996. The said proposal seeking for approval of appointment of the petitioner from 01.06.1996 was sent by the second respondent School. In the meantime, the said Arjunan also filed a writ petition in W.P.No.3667 of 2005 seeking for a direction to take over the management of the School by the Government. The said writ petition was dismissed on 21.11.2005. Thereafter, the present impugned order came to be passed, whereby the petitioner's appointment as 'Headmaster' was approved only with effect from 01.02.2006. Therefore, the present writ petition is filed before this court by the petitioner seeking for his approval from 01.06.1996.

(3.) IT is further stated by the first respondent that the School Committee convened on 07.08.2000 approved the appointment of the petitioner from his initial date of appointment, namely 01.06.1996 and consequently sent a proposal only on 10.01.2006 seeking for approval of the appointment of the petitioner. The said proposal sent by the second respondent does not contain the date on which the petitioner was appointed as Headmaster, pursuant to the order passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench. Considering the above said facts, the appointment of the petitioner as 'Headmaster' was approved only from 01.02.2006.