LAWS(MAD)-2012-12-283

CORRESPONDENT NEHRU MIDDLE SCHOOL Vs. DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION

Decided On December 21, 2012
Correspondent Nehru Middle School Appellant
V/S
DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner challenges the order of the 2nd respondent declaring two posts of Secondary Grade Teacher as surplus and consequently seeking for a direction to the 2nd respondent to approve the appointment of one MR.Shanthi as Secondary Grade Teacher with effect from 28.04.2008 and disburse the salary and other monetary benefits.

(2.) THE case of the petitioner is that the petitioner's School is a recognised and aided private School. It was established as a Primary School in the year 1920 and later on upgraded as Middle School in the year 1956. The petitioner School is offering education from Standard I to VIII. The total students strength was 194 and there were five teachers working in the institution, out of whom one is Headmaster and another one is B.T. Assistant and three are Secondary Grade Teachers. As per G.O.Ms.No.525, [School Education), dated 29.12.1997, a new ratio of 1:40 was adopted for fixation of the teachers strength. According to the above said norms, the School is entitled to have eight Secondary Grade Teachers on the basis of the students strength and the number of standards/classes. However, only six Secondary Grade Teacher posts were sanctioned so far. The 2nd respondent, while fixing the staff strength for the academic year 2008-2009, had shown only 4 teachers as eligible to the petitioner's School as per the G.O.Ms.No.525 and consequently, declared the other two Secondary Grade Teacher posts as surplus. In so far as the said two posts of Secondary Grade Teachers are concerned, which are declared as surplus, one became vacant on 2.06.2006 on account of the promotion of the incumbent as Headmaster. In respect of the other Secondary Grade post, the same became vacant on 07.12.2007 on account of retirement of the incumbent. The 2nd respondent also gave permission to fill up the said post through his proceedings, dated 27.03.2008. Accordingly, the petitioner's School appointed one MR.Shanthi as Secondary Grade Teacher with effect from 28.04.2008. The proposal for approval of such appointment was sent to the 2nd respondent. The 3rd respondent recommended the proposal through his proceedings, dated 23.12.2008. However, the 2nd respondent, without considering the recommendation made by the 3rd respondent, returned the proposal by stating that the appointment was made in the post, which was rendered surplus. The said rejection order passed by the 2nd respondent is challenged in this writ petition along with the staff fixation order made by the 2nd respondent for the academic year 2008-2009.

(3.) TH post at 140 and 5th of post at 180 and so on. The same norm is to be followed to Middle School also. Therefore, two posts were declared surplus taking note of the total strength of the students. 4.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that when the appointment of the said teacher MR. Shanthi was made on 28.04.2008, there was sufficient strength of students requiring six posts and the said person was also appointed within the sanctioned strength of six posts, the respondents cannot deny the approval of the said appointment. Moreover, the very 2nd respondent had given permission to fill up the said post, by his proceedings, dated 27.03.2008. Consequently the appointment was made on 28.04.2008. Therefore, now they cannot turn around and say that the post was declared as surplus and hence the appointment cannot be approved.