P K PADMAVATHY Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WRIT Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a WRIT of Mandamus directing the respondents to ratify the petitioner as Secondary Grade Teacher in Thiruvengada Vilas Middle School, Rasipuram, with effect from 01.06.1995 and to disburse to her pay and allowances from 01.06.1995 till this date with all consequential service and monetary benefits. This WRIT Petition is filed to issue a WRIT of Mandamus directing the respondents to ratify the petitioner as Secondary Grade Teacher in Thiruvengada Vilas Middle School, Rasipuram, with effect from 01.06.1995 and to disburse to her pay and allowances from 01.06.1995 till this date with all consequential service and monetary benefits.

(2.) THE writ petitioner in this case joined the fourth respondent school as a Pre-Vocational Teacher (Weaving) in June, 1995. According to the petitioner, she has been continuously working in the fourth respondent school, however, no salary has been paid by the fourth respondent school. THE request of the petitioner for ratification of the appointment through proper channel and the representation to the Chief Minister's Special Cell was considered and rejected by the District Elementary Educational Officer in his proceedings Na.Ka.No,5737/B2/98 dated 20.11.1998 stating that the appointment was not made by calling for candidates from the employment exchange and the fourth respondent institution has not followed the rules of Communal Rotation. It is further stated by the authority that the status of the fourth respondent school in respect of its claim for linguistic minority status is pending before the civil court and consequently the case of the petitioner cannot be considered at that point of time.

(3.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that she having been appointed as a secondary grade teacher in the fourth respondent school, her appointment should be approved by the competent authorities and she will be entitled to all consequential service and monetary benefits. At that time when the writ petition was filed, the authorities have not approved her appointment. THE appointment of the petitioner was not considered by the authorities as the fourth respondent school's claim with regard to linguistic minority status was not decided in view of the pendency of the civil court proceedings.