CHRISTI BAI Vs. SECRETARY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Writ Petitioner in W.P(MD)No.18260 of 2013 Mr.T.Baskar was appointed as B.T.Assistant in the third respondent/School. The Petitioner claims that he was appointed as Tamil Pandit on 4.9.1999 in a regular vacancy on account of the retirement of Mrs.S.Mary on 31.5.2006. The Writ Petitioner had discharged his duties as Tamil Pandit in the third respondent school continuously and to the satisfaction of the management. The Petitioner was promoted to the post of P.G.Assistant Tamil on 1.6.2006 by proceedings issued by the second respondent. The P.G.Assistant Tamil post became vacant on account of retirement of Mr.S.M.Sam Langlin on 31.5.2006. The Petitioner claims that he was appointed in a vacant post which was sanctioned by the competent authorities. Thus he is entitled for approval of appointment as per the rules.

(2.) The grievance of the Writ Petitioner is that the Headmaster of the third respondent school submitted a proposal to the first respondent seeking approval of the appointment of the Writ Petitioner. The learned counsel for the Writ Petitioner states that on account of the management dispute, the Headmaster had submitted a proposal seeking approval of the appointment. Thus the first respondent should consider the proposal submitted by the Headmaster in accordance with the act and the rules. This apart, on account of the management dispute, the Writ Petitioner is made to suffer without any fault on his side. Thus the Writ Petitioner is unable to get the salary and suffering on account of the management dispute.

(3.) W.P(Md)No.17587 of 2016 filed by Smt.Christi Bai to quash the order of rejection, dated 20.2.2014 and to direct the respondents 1 to 3 to approve the appointment of the Writ petitioner as P.G. Assistant Tamil w.e.f. 1.2007.