IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated:- 27.02.2008 Coram:- The Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.K.MISRA and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.CHANDRU Writ Petition No.17179 of 2003 and M.P. No.21488 of 2003 The Chairman, Teachers' Recruitment Board, College Road, Chennai-6. ... Petitioner vs. 1. R. Mahalakshmi 2. The Registrar, Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Chennai-104. ... Respondents Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the order dated 12.07.2002 of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, made in O.A. No.642 of 2002 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Dhandapani, Special Government Pleader. J U D G M E N T (Delivered by K.CHANDRU, J.) The Chairman of the Teachers' Recruitment Board is the petitioner herein. Aggrieved by the order, dated 12.07.2002, passed by the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Chennai, in O.A. No.642 of 2002, the present Writ Petition has been filed. 2. Before the Tribunal, the first respondent herein filed Original Application No.642 of 2002, challenging the selection made for the posts of School Assistant by the petitioner/Board. Curiously, the first respondent did not implead the State Government and the selected candidates as party respondents. On 11.02.2002, the https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Tribunal passed an interim direction to the effect that any appointment made, pursuant to the selection, shall be subject to the result of the Original Application. It transpires that the selection to the post of B.T. Assistant under the Tamil Nadu Educational Subordinate Service was finalised on 03.01.2002 and in respect of all the 29 posts notified against Zoology subject for the year 2001-2002, recruitment was duly made by appointing those candidates who were selected in accordance with merit and communal rotations. The Tribunal was not informed of the same and when the matter came up on 12.07.2002, the Government Advocate representing the petitioner submitted before the Tribunal that, since already directions have been issued that selection would be subject to result of the O.A., the main matter may be taken up. However, the Tribunal recording the submission made, gave a direction to the petitioner to temporarily select the applicants before it including the first respondent herein and give postings to them and ordered the Original Applications accordingly. 3. It is unfortunate that the Tribunal, without calling for requisite details from the writ petitioner regarding the exact nature of selection and without directing the first respondent to implead all the selected candidates, disposed of the Original Application that too with a curious direction that the applicants before it should be temporarily selected and given postings as Graduate School Assistants. When selection is made by the Recruitment Board, there is no question of any temporary selection and directing the Board to give posting. The only question before the Tribunal was as to whether the selection made is proper in accordance with the Rules. Such exercise has not been undertaken by the Tribunal, but on the contrary, an ipse dixit direction was given to select the first respondent. We cannot approve such course of action adopted by the Tribunal. It is also seen that the selected candidates are not before court. In these circumstances, the writ petition stands allowed and the impugned order of the Tribunal, dated 12.07.2002, passed in O.A. No.642 of 2002, is set aside. No costs. Connected Miscellaneous Petition stands closed. Sd/- Asst. Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar. JI. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ To The Chairman, Teachers Recruitment Board, College Road, Chennai 6. W.P. No.17179/2003. rl[co] gp/14.3. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/