S D RAJKUMAR Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE prayer in this Writ Petition is to quash the order of the first respondent dated 25. 05. 2006 and the consequential order passed by the second respondent through his proceedings dated 21. 08. 2006 and 05. 09. 2006 and for a direction to approve the appointment of the petitioner as Lab Assistant with all consequential benefits from the date of appointment.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that after passing Plus Two, he was appointed as Lab Assistant in the fourth respondent school on 05. 06. 2002, which is a private aided school. The third respondent through his proceedings dated 26. 12. 2002, stated that in view of the ban order issued by the Government in G. O. Ms. No. 212, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 29. 11. 2001, the petitioner's appointment cannot be approved. The said order dated 26. 12. 2002 was challenged by the petitioner in W. P. No. 16662 of 2003 before this Court on the ground that the ban order issued in the above referred G. O. , is not applicable to the private aided schools. When the said Writ Petition was taken up for final disposal, it was informed by the learned Government Advocate that the ban order issued in G. O. Ms. No. 212, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 29. 11. 2001 has been lifted by subsequent G. O. Ms. No. 14, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 07. 02. 2006. In view of the said submission, the petitioner requested for remanding the matter back to the second respondent in the said Writ Petition, (who is the third respondent herein) for fresh consideration in terms of the Government Order dated 07. 02. 2006. Based on the above submissions, this Court set aside the said order and remanded the matter back to the third respondent herein for fresh consideration by order dated 06. 07. 2007. The third respondent was directed to pass orders on merits and in accordance with law and in terms of G. O. Ms. No. 14, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 07. 02. 2006 within a period six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. Thereafter, the Director of School Education, through his proceedings dated 21. 08. 2006, rejected the approval of the petitioner even from 07. 02. 2006, by stating that the Government in Letter No. 11462/d2/06-1, dated 25. 05. 2006 stated that the Government is contemplating to issue revised norms in fixing the non-teaching posts in aided schools and till the revised norms are issued, there is no need to lift the ban imposed for filling up the non-teaching posts.

(3.) RELYING on the said order of the Director of School Education, the third respondent passed consequential order dated 05. 09. 2006 and both the said orders are challenged in this Writ Petition on the ground that neither the second respondent nor the Government can continue the ban order insofar as the non-teaching posts in private aided schools are concerned, as the Government lifted the ban through G. O. Ms. No. 14, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 07. 02. 2006, which was issued in the name of Governor under Article 162 of the Constitution of India.