TMT J REVATHI Vs. DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 22.05.2015 passed by the District Elementary Education Officer, Chennai, refusing to accord approval for appointment of the petitioner as Secondary Grade Teacher in the fourth respondent School.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the fourth respondent school was started in the year 1898 as Primary School and after upgradation as Middle School, two vacancies arose for the post of Secondary Grade Teacher due to superannuation of Tmt.Kousalya and Thiru.Boopathi on 31.05.2006 and 30.11.2008 respectively and subsequently, in the 2014, the District Elementary Education Officer, Chennai, has issued Staff Fixation Order, by which the fourth respondent school is entitled to have five Secondary Grade Teachers. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that when vacancy arose on account of the retirement of Thiru. Boopathi, the fourth respondent school appointed one Tmt.Sumathy on 02.12.2011 and a proposal was also sent by the fourth respondent to the second respondent seeking approval of such appointment. However, the second respondent, rejected the said proposal on the ground that Tmt.Sumathy did not possess the requisite educational qualification of pass in Teacher Eligibility Test and subsequently, she tendered her resignation on 18.10.2014, which was also accepted by the fourth respondent school. Since the petitioner possessed the requisite qualification including pass in Teacher Eligibility Test, she applied for the said post and she was called for interview and she was selected and appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher, vide order dated 09.02.2015 and she also joined in the said post. Pursuant to appointment of the petitioner as Secondary Grade Teacher, the fourth respondent school sent a proposal dated 30.03.2015 to the second respondent, through the third respondent, seeking approval of the petitioner's appointment as Secondary Grade Teacher, but yet another impugned order has been passed by the second respondent dated 22.05.2015 on the ground that the fourth respondent did not obtain prior permission from the Department.

(3.) The issue is well settled now that any school, either minority/private/aided or unaided, is entitled to fill up the vacancy arising on account of promotion, retirement, removal, dismissal etc., against a sanctioned post already approved by the school authorities, without even obtaining prior permission from the Government. A Division Bench of this Court, in P.Ravichandran v. State of Tamil Nadu and others, 2013 7 MadLJ 641, has settled that issue and, following the said judgment, I have also, in a batch of writ petitions, i.e., in W.P.(MD)Nos.14115 to 14119 of 2016 etc. (batch cases), (decided on 19.08.2016), ordered the official respondents therein to accord approval for filling up of the vacancies against sanctioned posts of non-teaching Staff by the Private Aided Schools. For better appreciation, relevant portions of the order passed by me are extracted below:-