1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 29.08.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR W.P.(MD)No.9109 of 2011 and M.P(MD)Nos.1 & 2 of 2011 R.Hemalatha .. Petitioner vs. 1.The Director of Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai - 6. 2.The District Elementary Educational Officer Theni, Theni District. 3.The Additional Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Periyakulam, Theni District. .. Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 1st respondent in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.1617/D3/2007, dated 11.06.2007 and the consequential order passed by the 3rd respondent in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.449A4/2011, dated 29.07.2011 and quash the same as illegal and consequentially direct the respondents to fix the petitioner's seniority in the panel of Secondary Grade Teacher fit for promotion to the post of Elementary School Head Master, taking into account of the rank assigned by the Tamil Nadu Teachers Recruitment Board in 1995 within a stipulated period. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Ajmal Khan For Respondents : Mr.S.Chandrasekar, Government Advocate ORDER The petitioner has sought for a Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the proceedings of the first respondent in Na.Ka.No.1617/D3/2007, dated 11.06.2007 and the consequential order passed by the third respondent, dated 29.07.2011, in Na.Ka.No.449A4/2011. Consequently she has also sought for a direction, directing the respondents to fix the petitioner seniority in the panel of Secondary Grade Teacher fit for promotion to the post of Elementary School Headmaster, taking into account of the rank assigned by the Tamil Nadu Teachers Recruitment Board in 1995, within a stipulated period. 2.Assailing the impugned orders, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in G.O.Ms.No.388 Education, Science and Technical Education Department, dated 19.06.1996, specific orders have been issued to the effect that teachers appointed by the Tamil Nadu Teachers Recruitment Board in the year 1995, are entitled for transfer https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 to any District or Union and if any such transfer is effected, the rank assigned by the Tamil Nadu Teachers Recruitment Board has to be maintained. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner further contended that when the petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher in 1995, she was placed at Serial No.2789, as per the ranking given by the Tamil Nadu Teachers Recruitment Board and that she was transferred to the Panchayat Union Middle School, Genguvarpatti on 23.10.2000. While so, the respondents 2 & 3 prepared a list of seniority of Secondary Grade Teacher fit for promotion to the post of Elementary School Head Master, as on 01.01.2011, in which, the petitioner was placed at serial No.68, instead of serial No.5 and that it is contrary to the guidelines issued by the Government in the above referred G.O. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that the petitioner has also made a representation on 22.06.2011, to the Additional Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Periyakulam, Theni District, the third respondent herein, requesting to fix her correct seniority in the panel, for which, the third respondent has issued the impugned order, dated 29.07.2011, rejecting her request. 4. Inviting the attention of this Court to the orders of this Court in W.P(MD).No.5418 of 2007 etc., batch, dated 30.03.2010, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that inasmuch as the proceedings of the Director of Elementary Education, Chennai, dated 11.06.2007, has already been quashed, the respondents are bound to place the petitioner, as per the original rank assigned by the Tamil Nadu Teachers Recruitment Board. Hence, he prayed to set aside the impugned orders and direct the respondents to fix the seniority of the petitioner in the panel of Secondary Grade Teacher fit for promotion to the post of Elementary School Head Master, based on the rank assigned by the Tamil Nadu Teachers Recruitment Board, in 1995. 5. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that initially, teachers recruited through the Tamil Nadu Teachers Recruitment Board in the year 1995 were allowed to retain their original rank assigned by the Teachers Recruitment Board, if they are transferred from outside district to native district only once. However, he has conceded that no appeal has been filed against the order of this Court made in W.P(MD).No.5418 of 2007 etc., batch, dated 30.03.2010. 6. Heard the submissions made by both parties and perused the materials available on record. 7. Material on record shows that the petitioner was appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher by the Tamil Nadu Teachers Recruitment Board, at Panchayat Elementary School Kottakudi, Bodi Union, Theni District and after that, on 23.10.2000, she was transferred to Panchayat Union Middle School, Genguvarpatti. According to the petitioner, she has completed fifteen years of service and she is anxiously waiting for promotion to the post of Headmaster in Panchayat Union School. It is the further contention that in the panel of Secondary Grade Teacher fit for promotion to the post of Elementary School Head Master, prepared by the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 respondents 2 & 3, she was placed at Serial No.68, instead of at serial No.5, because of the revised instructions of the Director of Elementary Education, Chennai, in R.C.No.16170/D3/2007, dated 11.06.2007. 8. Perusal of the order of this Court made in W.P(MD)No.5418 of 2008 etc. batch of Writ petitions, dated 30.03.2010, shows that the very proceedings of the Director of Elementary Education, dated 11.06.2007, has been challenged and that there was consequential prayer to direct the respondents therein to consider the petitioners therein for the promotion for the post of Headmaster in Elementary Schools in various Panchayat unions. Considering the intention of the Government in issuing G.O.Ms.No.388, Education, Science and Technical Education Department, dated 19.06.1996, a direction has been issued to retain the original seniority rank assigned by the Tamil Nadu Teachers Recruitment Board, even after transfer from one Union to another, the subsequent clarification, dated 11.06.2007, has been quashed. The operative portion of the order made in the above batch of Writ petitions is extracted hereunder: “6.I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by both the counsels. According to me, the issue is no longer res-integra and this Court has already held in W.P(MD)No.22499 of 2007, dated 10.04.2008, that G.O.Ms.No.388 cannot be confined only to transfers from one District to another District. In the aforesaid Writ petition in W.P(MD)No.22499 of 2007, similar order passed by the second respondent was challenged and while interpreting G.O.Ms.No.388 and also the subsequent proceedings, dated 10.03.2000 and 4.10.2001 issued by the respondent as a clarification to the G.O.Ms.No.388, the learned Judge observed as follows: “The said set of expression contained in the proceedings, dated 10.03.2000, if applied by referring to the statement found in the proceedings, dated 04.10.2001 again in paragraph 5 of the said proceedings, it can be stated without any contradiction that as a one time measure, the teachers, selected and appointed in 1995 under the selection made by the Teachers Recruitment Board, are entitled to seek for transfer irrespective of their initial place of posting whether it be to their native District or native panchayat union.” 7.Therefore, it has been made clear by the learned Judge that as a one time measure, the persons who got transfer whether from one District to another District or from one Panchayat Union to another Panchayat Union within the same District are entitled to the benefits of G.O.Ms.No.388 and they are entitled to retain the seniority. The said judgment was followed the other judgments referred to above. It is further admitted that no appeal has been filed by the State against those judgments and hence the judgments have become final and I do not see any reason to form a different opinion from that of the views expressed by the learned Judge in those judgments. Further in the judgment in (1992) 4 SCC 455, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that the seniority should not be https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 disturbed after long lapse of time. The same principle is also reiterated in the judgment reported in (1998) 2 SCC 523 in B.S.Bajwa and another Vs. State of Punjab and others. Therefore, on the basis of the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to above, the seniority of the petitioners, whose transfer was effected in the year 1996, 2000 and 2001 cannot be interfered with by the impugned proceedings in the year 2007. Further as per the judgment of this Court referred to above, G.O.Ms.No.388 cannot confine to transfer from one District to another District and it is applicable to transfer from one Panchyat Union to another Panchayat Union, within the same District, as a one time measure and those persons are also entitled to retain seniority.” 9.Inasmuch as, the proceedings dated 11.06.2007 of the Director of Elementary Education, Chennai has been quashed, downgrading of the petitioner and her consequential placement in position in the revised panel for the post of Headmaster, Panchayat Union Elementary Schools, has to be rectified. 10.In such circumstances, the impugned order, dated 29.07.2011, rejecting the request of the petitioner is also liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the impugned order, passed by the first respondent, dated 11.06.2007 and the consequential order passed by the Additional Assistant District Elementary Education Officer, Theni District, the third respondent, dated 14.05.2008, are set aside. Accordingly, a direction is issued to the respondents to restore the petitioner to her original seniority as assigned by the Teachers Recruitment Board, as per G.O.Ms.No.388, Education, Science and Technical Education Department, dated 19.06.1996. 11. With the above direction, the Writ petition is allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. No Costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CO) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Director of Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai - 6. 2.The District Elementary Educational Officer, Theni, Theni District. 3.The Additional Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Periyakulam, Theni District. +1cc to Mr.M.Ajmal Khan, Advocate SR.No.29711 +1cc to The Special Govt.Pleader SR.No.29566 W.P.(MD)No.9109 of 2011 29.08.2011 gcg PA/08.09.2011/4P/6C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/