உங்கள் பார்வைக்கு அரசாணையில் குறிப்பிடப்பட்டுள்ள Writ Petition No.30734 of 2008 சென்னை உயர் நீதிமன்ற தீர்ப்பு
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 27.11.2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR Writ Petition No.30734 of 2008 1.K.P.K.Vijay Baalaji, 2.Ravi, 3.R.Vimalathithan, 4.M.Elangovan. ... Petitioners vs. 1.The Secretary to Government, Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Director of Elementary Education, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 006. 3.The Chief Educational Officer, Karur District, Karur. ... Respondents Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent culminating in and by his proceeding Na.Ka.No.20108/L3/2006 dated 11.8.2008 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to regularize the petitioners' serve as per G.O.Ms.No.116, Education Department dated 11.9.2003 in the Secondary Grade Teachers post. For Petitioner : Mr.V.Bharathidasan For Respondents : Mr.A.Suresh, Government Advocate(Education). ----- O R D E R
This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the second respondent culminating in and by his proceeding Na.Ka.No.20108/L3/2006 dated 11.8.2008 and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to regularize the petitioners' serve as per G.O.Ms.No.116, Education Department dated 11.9.2003 in the Secondary Grade Teachers post.
2. Petitioners 1 to 4 belongs to the Schedule Caste Community. On completion of Higher Secondary School Certificate, they underwent Diploma and Teacher Training and have registered their names with Karur Employment Exchange in the month of November, 2001. The Chief Educational Officer, Karur took steps to appoint Secondary Grade Teachers for the year 2001. There were 207 vacancies, of which 22 vacancies are relatable to Backlog vacancies for Schedule Caste, Schedule Tribe and Most Backward Class candidates. As per the Communal Reservation Roster, out of total number of 207 vacancies, 117 vacancies will go to Backward Class and Open Competition; 41 vacancies will go to Most Backward Class and 49 vacancies will go to SC and ST. List of eligible candidates were called for from the District Employment Exchange. In the list of candidates forwarded by the Employment Exchange, the names of the petitioners did not find place. Out of the list sent by the Employment Exchange, the third respondent appointed 129 candidates and the break up of the appointment is as follows:-
1) Open Competition - 57 candidates 2) Backward Class - 54 candidates 3) Most Backward Class - 11 candidates 4) SC and ST - 7 candidates ----------------- 129 candidates -----------------
Insofar as the Most Backward Class, only 11 were selected and in respect of SC and ST, 7 persons alone were appointed. In effect, the petitioners, who belong to the SC and ST Category and who are eligible to be considered for appointment were not considered as their names did not figure in the list of candidates forwarded by the Employment Exchange. Petitioners made a representation to the District Collector and the Government and the third respondent stating that they are eligible candidates and their names also should be considered. The grievance of the petitioners and similarly placed persons were considered by the Government and G.O.Ms.No.116 Education Department dated 11.9.2003 was passed. Paragraphs 4 to 7 of the G.O.Ms.No.116 dated 11.9.2003 which is relevant for this case reads as follows:-
VERNACULAR (TAMIL) PORTION DELETED In effect the Government considering the recommendation of the Director of School Education, ordered that the 37 vacancies to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher relatable to the year 2001-2002 should be considered as a special case and should be filled up as vacancies of the year 2003-2004. The vacancies to the SC, ST category, therefore, had to be filled up in accordance with the above said direction.
3. Since the G.O.Ms.116 dated 11.9.2003 was not given effect to in pith and substance, W.P.No.39813 of 2005 was filed and the Court directed the Director of Elementary Education, the second respondent herein, by its order dated 4.9.2007 to consider and dispose off the representation on merits in the light of G.O.Ms.No.116 dated 11.9.2003. Consequent to this, the Director of Elementary Education, the second respondent passed the impugned order dated 11.8.2008 rejecting the claim of the petitioners stating that in view of the G.O.Ms.No.100 dated 27.6.2003, the petitioners cannot be appointed to the substantive post. They will be entitled to the appointment on consolidated pay as contained in G.O.Ms.No.100 dated 27.6.2003. The claim of the petitioners was rejected stating that no benefit can be granted to the petitioners except in terms of G.O.Ms.No.100 dated 27.6.2003. Present writ petition is filed challenging the said order.
4. No counter is filed on behalf of the respondents. However, Mr.A.Suresh, learned Government Advocate states that in G.O.Ms.No.116 dated 11.9.2003, the G.O.Ms.No.100 dated 27.6.2003 was not considered and therefore, the claim of the petitioners was rejected.
5. G.O.Ms.No.100 dated 27.6.2003 was passed to appoint persons on consolidated pay so as to overcome a ban imposed with regard to the appointments. It was a measure taken by the Government to overcome certain difficulties that arose in the administration of the school education. Whereas in G.O.Ms.No.116 dated 11.9.2003, the Government considered the backlog vacancies which was omitted. It has been specifically pointed out in the G.O.Ms.No.116 dated 11.9.2003 that there are backlog vacancies of the year 2001-2002 in respect of SC and ST candidates which were not filled up. This cause an anomaly insofar as merit candidates of SC and ST community. Therefore, special permission was granted by the Government. In such circumstances, the third respondent is not justified in rejecting the plea of the petitioners on the ground that their claim will not be considered for the 37 unfilled regular vacancies in view of the G.O.Ms.No.100 dated 27.6.2003. If the Government had wanted to deny the benefit to SC, ST Community, it would not have directed the filling of the 37 vacant post by invoking G.O.Ms.No.100 dated 27.6.2003 which was already in force. The omission is conscious and specific to correct the anomaly.
6. In the present case, the 37 backlog vacancies are relatable to the year 2001-2002 whereas G.O.Ms.No.100 dated 27.6.2003 is prospective and it cannot apply to the backlog vacancies for which a special provision has been made in G.O.Ms.No.116 dated 11.9.2003. The second respondent has failed to consider the differentiation between both the two G.Os. G.O.Ms.No.116 dated 11.9.2003 is specifically intended for the 37 backlog vacancies. Whereas G.O.Ms.No.100 dated 27.6.2003 does not apply to the 37 backlog vacancies meant for the SC and ST candidates. This vital difference has been overlooked by the authority. In any event, the G.O.Ms.No.116 dated 11.9.2003 is binding on the school authority and they are bound to implement it.
7. In such view of the matter, the writ petitioners are entitled to the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.116 dated 11.9.2003 and their names along with all other eligible candidates shall be considered for the purpose of appointment to the 37 backlog vacancies under the SC and ST category. The impugned order passed contrary to the G.O.Ms.No.116 dated 11.9.2003 is set aside. The third respondent is directed to proceed in accordance with G.O.Ms.No.116 dated 11.9.2003. The Writ petition is allowed in the above terms. No order as to costs.
ts To
1.The Secretary to Government, Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Director of Elementary Education, Nungambakkam, Chennai-600 006.
3.The Chief Educational Officer, Karur District, Karur
கருத்துகள் இல்லை:
கருத்துரையிடுக