LAWS(MAD)-2009-7-536

R JEEVA Vs. DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION

Decided On July 31, 2009
R. JEEVA Appellant
V/S
DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a WRIT of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records of the first and second respondents in relation to O.M.No,40341/EG2/2000, dated 16.2.2001 and in N.K.No.10712/A2/2000 dated 29.12.2000 respectively and quash the same and consequently issue a direction to the first and second respondents to approve the petitioner's promotion as Middle School Headmaster in the 4th respondent management school with effect from 16.11.2000 with service and monetary benefits.) The prayer in this writ petition is to quash the order dated 29.12.2000, passed by the second respondent and the order dated 16.2.2001, passed by the first respondent, and direct the respondents 1 and 2 to approve the petitioner's promotion as Middle School Headmaster in the 5th respondent School with effect from 16.11.2000, with monetary and service benefits.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is as follows:

(3.) THE 5th respondent filed counter affidavit by contending that the promotion order given to the petitioner was not approved by the second respondent relying G.O.Ms.No,400 Education, Science and Technology Department, dated 25.5.1995 and the management filed appeal before the first respondent on 31.1.2001 and the same was also rejected by the first respondent, which is contrary to Rule 15(4) and 15(6) of the Rules. THE management considered the merit and ability of the petitioner and the 4th respondent on 16.11.2000 and the School Committee considered the claim of all the eligible persons, which was ordered to be considered by the order of this Court dated 22.9.2000. THE petitioner as well as the 4th respondnet were found eligible with respect to qualifications including experience. THE power of selection having been vested with the School Committee, the respondents 1 and 2 have no jurisdiction to give direction to the management to promote the 4th respondent as Headmistress based on seniority alone. In effect, the 5th respondent supports the case of the petitioner.