R NEELAMEGAM Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) W.P.No.457 of 2000 is filed for the issue of a writ of Certiorari to call for the records on the file of the first respondent in connection with G.O.Ms.No.559, Education, dated 11.7.1995 and other consequential orders in so far as they affect the interest of the petitioner and quash the same. W.P.No.4791 of 2003 is filed for the issue of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records on the file of the first respondent in connection with G.O.(per) No.155, School Education (D2) Dept.l, dated 3.10.2002 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to grant secondary grade scale of pay to the petitioner with effect from 1.5.1998 till the completion of five years of service and thereafter in the post of Headmaster without insisting on one month training in Child Psychology by approving the petitioner's appointment as Headmaster.

(2.) The facts leading to the filing of the writ petitions are common and it is seen from the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, W.P.No.457 of 2000 that the fourth respondent is an Elementary School and the post of Headmaster in the fourth respondent school fell vacant on 1.12.1998. It is the case of the petitioner that the third respondent, Assistant Elementary Education Officer, Vedaranniyam tried to fill up the vacancy with a senior most qualified Secondary Grade Teacher and all Secondary Grade Teachers gave letters of unwillingness to be appointed as a Headmaster. It is stated by the petitioner that he was having necessary educational qualification and was appointed as a Headmaster in the fourth respondent school. The petitioner, at the time of appointment as Headmaster of the Elementary School, as seen from the affidavit, was possessing B.Litt. & TPT (Tamil Pandit) Training. He also passed B.T. (Tamil) subsequently as seen from the Transfer Certificate issued by the Annamalai University dated 23.8.1999, but he did not possess Diploma in Teacher Education and he was also not having the work experience of five years as Secondary Grade Teacher. The proposal to appoint the petitioner as Headmaster in the Elementary School was forwarded to the third respondent by the management of the fourth respondent school and it was rejected on the ground that the petitioner was not qualified as per rules as well as G.O.No.559 School Education Department dated 11.7.1995. Since the appointment of the petitioner as Headmaster was not approved, the petitioner has filed W.P.No.457 of 2000 challenging the G.O.Ms.No.559, Education dated 11.7.1995.

(3.) As far as other writ petition in W.P.No.4791 of 2003 is concerned, the petitioner has filed the writ petition challenging the G.O.(Per) No.155, School Education (D2), Dept.1, dated 3.10.2002 and for other reliefs, as set out earlier. The G.O., which is challenged in the second writ petition was issued when the G.O.Ms.No.599, dated 11.7.1995 was upheld by this Court.