CORRESPONDENT, BONIFACE HIGH SCHOOL Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition is filed challenging the impugned proceedings issued by the third respondent dated 23.09.2015 and for issuing further direction to the third respondent to approve forthwith the appointment of Tmt.A.P.Jeyarosi by way of promotion as Headmistress of the petitioner school with effect from 01.06.2015 and disburse the grant-in-aid towards her salary with allowances and all other attendant benefits.

(2.) It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is a minority institution and obtained a declaration from the 9th Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, in O.S.No.4330 of 1982 with regard to minority status of the petitioner institution. The petitioner further submits that the post of Head Master in the petitioner institution fell vacant on 01.06.2015 due to the retirement of the then incumbent one Mr.Arul Pragasam on 31.05.2015. It appears that the petitioner appointed one Tmt.A.P.Jeyarosi as Headmistress by way of promotion with effect from 01.06.2015 and submitted proposal to the third respondent with necessary documents and particulars for grant of approval to the appointment. Despite the petitioner enclosed all necessary documents and particulars, the proposal was turned down by the third respondent only on the ground that the petitioner's status as minority institution has neither been approved by the Government nor by the High Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the declaration of the minority status of the petitioner institution by the Civil Court in O.S.No.4330 of 1982 dated 08.08.1985 is sufficient for the respondent to recognize the petitioner institution as minority institution and the reason found in the order is contrary to the judgement of this Court in a catena of judgements. The learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgement of a Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in the case of The Secretary, D.G.Vaishnav College v. Dr.T.Venkataraman, 2001 4 CTC 641.

(3.) The fact that the petitioner institution has been declared as a minority institution in the proceeding in O.S.No.4330/1982 on the file of the 9th Assistant City Civil Court, Chennai, by judgement dated 08.08.1985 is not in dispute. On further appeal by the Government in A.S.No.97 of 1987 on the file of the Second Additional Judge, City Civil Court, Chennai, the decree in O.S.No.4330 of 1982 was confirmed. The declaration granted by the City Civil Court, therefore, has become final. In such circumstances, this Court has categorically held in the case of The Secretary, D.G.Vaishnav College v. Dr.T.Venkataraman, 2001 4 CTC 641 that where the decree of Civil Court declaring minority status has become final, especially, where the Government also is a party to the proceedings before the Civil Court, the Government is bound by such decree unless there is specific legislation which declares such decree granted by Civil Court is not binding. The Division Bench has categorically approved the view expressed by a learned Single Judge of this Court in yet another Writ petition. The learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon another judgement of this Court by a learned Single Judge in the case in Nalloor Vettuvenni Kandan Sastha Devaswom College at Attoor and N.V.K.S. Educational Agency, Vettuvenni, Marthandam, Kanyakumari District, rep by its Secretary Mr.S.Krishnamukar v. Government of Tamil Nadu,2010 4 MadLJ 517, where the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in several cases were interpreted and held that the order rejecting the request of minority institution to treat the institution as a minority institution based on the declaration granted by a competent Court is bad and further observed that the order of Hon'ble Supreme Court cannot be applied to nullify a decree obtained by an institution which was not party to the proceedings before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Similarly, in the case of Kamaraj Memorial Higher Secondary School v. Government of Tamil Nadu,2010 5 MadLJ 172, it has been held that a declaration made by a competent Civil Court about the minority status of an institution need not apply to the Government to declare once again its status. Similar view was also expressed by the same Judge in another case in Asan Memorial Association v. The State of Tamil Nadu, 2009 WritLR 897. The learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon another judgement of a learned Single Judge of this Court in W.P.No.1707 of 2011, dated 04.06.2012.