IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS Dated:- 15.06.2006 Coram:- The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P.SATHASIVAM and The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.DHANAPALAN Writ Appeal Nos.569 to 571 of 2000 M. Jothi ... Petitioner/Appellant in WA.569/2000 SP.Subbiah ... Petitioner/Appellant in WA.570/2000 S.Maga Mayee ... Petitioner/Appellant in WA.571/2000 Vs. 1.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai-600 006. 2.The District Educational Officer, Sivagangai District. 3.The Additional Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Devakottai. 4.Muthathal Middle School, rep. by its Correspondent/Secretary, Devakottai, Sivagangai District. ... Respondents/Respondents in all WAs. Writ appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 04.02.2000 made in W.P.Nos.1983 to 1985 of 2000 W.P.Nos.1983 to 1985 of 2000 : These petitions presented to this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the Respondents 1 to 3 herein to approve the appointment of the petitioner as a Secondary Grade Teacher in the 4th Respondent School. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ For Appellants : Mr.Rathina Asohan in all WAs. For Respondents : Mrs.Bhavani Subbarayan, in all WAs. Govt. Advocate for R.1to R.3 No appearance for R.4 JUDGMENT (Order of the Court was made by P.SATHASIVAM, J.) Against the common order dated 04.02.2000 made in W.P.Nos.1983 to 1985 of 2000 dismissing all the writ petitions challenging G.O.Ms.No.559 Education Science and Technology Department dated 11.07.1995, the petitioners therein have filed the present appeals. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and Mrs.Bhavani Subbarayan, learned Government Advocate for respondents 1 to 3. 3. It is not in dispute that the validity of the G.O.Ms.No.559 Education Science and Technology Department dated 11.07.1995 has been upheld by the decision of Division Bench of this Court reported in 2002 Writ Law Reporter 173(SECRETARY AND CORRESPONDENT, USWATHUN HASANA ORIENTAL (ARABIC) GIRLS HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, PALLAPATHI 639 205, KARUR DISTRICT VS. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND FOUR OTHERS). In such circumstances, following the same, these writ appeals are liable to be dismissed and accordingly, the same are dismissed. No costs. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants submits that in view of various subsequent orders passed by the Government and of the fact that the appellants are continuing in the posts of Secondary Grade Assistant, they seek direction from this Court that their claim may be considered by the Government sympathetically. 5. The appellants are permitted to make a representation to the first respondent viz.,Director of School Education, Chennai-6, highlighting their stand supported by the Government orders, if any. If any such representation is made to the first respondent, the said https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ authority is directed to consider and dispose of the same in accordance with law expeditiously, if the same is permissible. Sd/- Asst. Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst. Registrar. raa To 1.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai-600 006. 2.The District Educational Officer, Sivagangai District. 3.The Additional Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Devakottai. + 1 CC to the Government Pleader SR NO 24965 W.A.Nos.569 to 571 of 2000 15.06.2006. ak(co) gp/21.6. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/