IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 15.6.2009 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR Writ Petition No.36130 of 2003 P.K.Padmavathy. ... Petitioner vs. 1. The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by its Secretary to Government, Educational Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2. The Director of Elementary Education, Chennai - 600 006. 3. The District Elementary Educational Officer, Namakkal. 4. The Secretary, Thiruvengada Vilas Middle School, Rasipuram, Namakkal District. ... Respondents 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. For Petitioner : Ms.Prasanna Devi for Mr.M.Ravi. For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.A.Suresh, Government Advocate. ----- O R D E R This Writ Petition is filed to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to ratify the petitioner as Secondary Grade https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 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. It is contended by the counsel for the petitioner that in the case of another teacher, Thiru Selvakumar, who was appointed prior to the petitioner, the case was considered by the respondent school authorities and his appointment was ratified subject to the result of the suit pending before the civil court with regard to the fourth respondent school's claim for linguistic minority status. 4. It is submitted by the counsel for the petitioner that the suit filed by the fourth respondent school claiming linguistic minority status was dismissed on 3.3.2003. Fourth respondent school was directed to approach the Government and seek appropriate relief. By order dated 10.9.2003, in W.P.No.17129 of 2003, challenging the show-cause notice dated 3.6.2003 issued by the third respondent, this Court passed the following order:- "3. I am of the view that it would meet the ends of justice if a direction is issued to the third respondent not to proceed further on the show cause notice until or otherwise a final order is passed on the representation dated 6-5-2003 said to have been filed before the second and fourth respondents. It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel Mr.Badhsha appearing for the petitioner that the State Minority Commission has also recommended the petitioner institution as a minority institution. Therefore, while passing orders on the representation of the petitioner dated 6-5-2003, the respondents are directed to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ take into consideration of the recommendation so made by the minority commission. It is open to the respondents to proceed further on the basis of the order to be passed on the representation of the petitioner dated 6-5-2003." Consequent to this direction, after a long period of time and after considering the order passed by this Court cited above, the Government has issued G.O.Ms.No.91, School Education (X2) Department dated 31.03.2009 as follows:- @(i) 10?9?2003 md;W brd;id cah;ePjpkd;wk; W.P.No.17129/2003?,y; , uhrpg[uk; brsuhc&;ouh fy;tp epWtdk; tH';fpa jPh;g;gpd; mog;gilapy;. me;epWtdk; 6?5?2003 ehspl;l fojj;jpy; nfhhpa[s;sthW. ,uhrpg[uk; brsuhc&;ouh fy;tp mwf;fl;lis elj;Jk; jpUnt';fl tpyh!; eLepiyg; gs;sp bkhHpthhp rpWghd;ikapdh; fy;tp epWtdk; vd;W Miz btspaplg;gLfpwJ/ (ii) murhiz (epiy) vz; 214. gs;spf; fy;tp (vf;!;2) Jiw ehs; 3-11-2008?d;go ,g;gs;spf;F muR Miz btspapLk; ehspypUe;J Ie;J Mz;LfSf;F ,g;gs;spf;F rpWghd;ik jFjp tH';fg;gLfpwJ/ (iii) ehkf;fy; khtl;lk;. ,uhrpg[uk; jpUnt';fpl tpyh!; epjpa[jtp bgWk; eLepiyg; gs;spapd; eph;thfj;jhy; epakdk; bgw;w Mrphpah;f;s bjhlh;e;J gzpg[hpa [k;. c&Pyh nldpay;. ,ilepiy Mrphpah; kw;Wk; bg/,/gj;khtjp. ifj;bjhHpy; Mrphpia Mfpa ,UtuJ gzp epakdj;jpw;F Vw;gspg;g[ bra;Jk; Miz btspaplg;gLfpwJ/@ 5. 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. 6. The learned Government Advocate referred to the G.O.Ms.No.91 School Education(X2) Department dated 31.3.2009 and stated that consequent to the passing of the G.O. as above, the claim of the petitioner and other teachers will be considered by the appropriate authorities and suitable orders will have to be passed with regard to the claim for salary and other service benefits. Therefore, necessary direction could be issued to the authorities to pass appropriate orders keeping in mind the G.O.No.91 School Education dated 31.3.2009 granting the linguistic minority status to the fourth respondent school. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 7. Earlier order of this court passed in W.P.No.17129 of 2003 on 10.9.2003, restrained the authorities from proceeding further in the matter until the representation of the fourth respondent school was considered. Now that the representation has been considered and G.O.Ms.No.91 School Education(X2) dated 31.3.2009 has been passed, there can be no impediment for the respondent school authorities to consider the claim of the petitioner on merits. 8. In the result, respondents 1 to 3 are directed to pass appropriate orders with regard to the claim of the writ petitioner for service and monetary benefits in the light of G.O.Ms.No.91 School Education (X2) dated 31.3.2009, within a reasonable period of time preferably within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The Writ Petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Sd/ Asst.Registrar /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar ts To 1. The Secretary to Government, Educational Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2. The Director of Elementary Education, Chennai - 600 006. 3. The District Elementary Educational Officer, Namakkal. 1 cc To Mr.M.Ravi, Advocate, SR.23505 1 cc To The Government Pleader, SR.23222 W.P.No.36130 of 2003 BV(co) SRA(25/6/2009) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/