S PITCHAIRATHINAM Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARDMR. V. Selvanayagam , the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. A. Arumugam , the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 to 3.

(2.) THE petitioner had submitted that he was appointed asa Junior cum Warden in the Boys Home Usilampatty , in the rank of graduate Teacher from 24. 08. 1967. THE petitioner had obtained P. G. Qualification and he was working as a Post Graduate teacher from 21. 09. 1978 at Nattarmangalam Higher Secondary School. When the Checkkanurani High School, in which the petitioner was working, was upgraded as a Higher secondary School, during the academic year 1980-1981, the petitioner had applied for appointment of Head master of the Higher Secondary School, as he was the senior most and a qualified candidate for such appointment. However, without assigning any reason, another person, who was working as Head Master in the High School, had been transferred and posted as the Head Master of the Checkkanurani Higher Secondary School in which the petitioner was working. Similarly, when the Rajadhani High School was upgraded during the academic year 1986-1987 as Higher Secondary School , the petitioner had made an application requesting the second and third respondents to promote and appoint him as the Head Master of the Checkkanurani Higher Secondary School. Once again his request was turned down and the person, who is junior to him had been transferred and posted as Head Master of the Higher Secondary School. Similarly, the petitioner's request had not been considered by the respondents for appointment as Head Master, even though the petitioner had been fully qualified for the said post. THErefore, the petitioner had challenged the order passed by the third respondent, dated 31. 08. 1994, in R. O. C. No. B-1/16643/93 and had prayed for a suitable direction, to consider and promote the petitioner as Head Master in any of the Higher secondary Schools run by the third respondent under the control of the second respondent.

(3.) ON such submissions being made, the third respondent is directed to calculate the monetary benefits that would be notionally due to the petitioner and submit his report to the first respondent for his due consideration, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. ON receipt of such report, the first respondent is to pass appropriate orders thereon, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks thereafter. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. .