A.BEAULA Vs. THE DISTRICT ELEMENTARY EDUCATIONAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr.S.Gunasekaran, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 and 2.

(2.) The petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher in a minority Aided School run by CSI -Diocese, Madras in the year 1989. Subsequently, he was promoted as Primary School Headmaster in the year 2002. The claim of the petitioner shows that after qualifying herself with B.A., Economics in the year 1997, M.A., Economics in the year 2004 and B.Ed., in the year 2011, as a teacher, she is qualified with the Degree in other subjects viz., Sociology, Political Science and Economics, as per G.O.Ms.No.134 School Education department dated 15.06.2007 for promotion to the post of BT Assistant/Middle School Headmaster, provided she would have obtained Bachelor Degree prior to 01.01.2007. She became eligible for promotion to the post of Middle School Headmaster as per G.O.Ms.No.134 dated 15.03.2007. While so, when a vacancy arose to the post of Middle School Headmaster after the retirement of Tmt.Mary Nirmala on 31.3.2013 in CSI Middle School, Triplicane, the CSI -Diocese prepared a joint seniority list showing the petitioner as a senior most person to be considered for the post of Middle School Headmaster. Subsequently, the Central Recruitment Board of CSI - Diocese of Madras conducted selection to the post of Middle School Headmaster, in which petitioner also participated in the interview conducted on 21.5.2013. The petitioner was also successfully selected for promotion to the post of Middle School Headmaster. Based on the selection, the Central Recruitment Board of CSI -Diocese of Madras issued promotion and transfer orders on 23.6.2013 promoting the petitioner to the post of Middle School Headmaster of CSI Middle School, Triplicane with effect from 1.7.2013. The petitioner also joined the post of Middle School Headmaster on 1.7.2013. Thereafter, when the 3rd respondent forwarded proposal to the 2nd respondent seeking approval for her promotion, the 2nd respondent in turn forwarded the same to the 1st respondent. After scrutiny of the papers, the 1st respondent passed proceedings dated nil.10.2013 calling for further particulars from the 3rd respondent and the same were also furnished. But the 1st respondent after receiving additional particulars rejected the proposal forwarded by the 3rd respondent by proceedings dated 20.11.2013, which is impugned herein.

(3.) Challenging the impugned order, it has been contended by learned counsel for petitioner that the issue raised in the present writ petition is squarely covered by an order of this Court in the case of C.Devanesan Vs. The District Elementary Educational Officer, Villupuram District and another in W.P.No.21679 of 2012, dated 27.8.2012 and the relevant portion of the order passed therein is as under: