In the High Court of Judicature at Madras Dated: 31.10.2008 Coram: The Honourable Mr.Justice P.JYOTHIMANI Writ Petition No.25779 of 2008 and M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2008 G.Chita ..Petitioner ..vs.. 1. The Joint Director of Elementary Education, D.P.I.Campus, Chennai-600 006. 2. The District Elementary Educational Officer, D.P.I.Campus, College Road, Chennai-600 006. 3. The Kannappa Nayanar Aided Middle School, Royapuram, Chennai-13 rep.by its Correspondent/Secretary. ..Respondents Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, filed to issue a Writ of Certiorarifiled Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the 2nd respondent's Proceedings made in Na.Ka.No.2684/B306 dated 8.09.2008 and quash the same and direct the respondents to retain the petitioner in the 3rd respondent management school with all service and monetary benefits. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Muthappan For Respondents : Ms.Renganayaki, G.A.(Edn.), ORDER
Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Ms.Ranganayaki, learned Government Advocate, who has taken notice on behalf of the respondents.
2. The order of the 2nd respondent dated 08.09.2008 is under challenge in this writ petition. The writ petitioner was appointed as B.T.Assistant in the 3rd respondent school on 21.06.1983 in a regular vacancy and her appointment was approved by the educational authorities. It appears that on the retirement of the previous Headmistress in June 2006, who was also a Tamil Teacher, the 3rd respondent school has surrendered the post of Tamil Teacher on the basis of fall of strength of students. It was consequent to the said surrender, the 2nd respondent District Elementary Educational Officer has passed an order on 27.02.2007 transferring the petitioner to Thiruvalluvar Gurukulam Middle School, Saidapet, Chennai-15. It is seen that after the order was passed, the petitioner went on medical leave. The transfer order, which was actually a re-deployment order, was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.No.12812 of 2007, which was dismissed. Against which, a writ appeal in W.A.No.1486 of 2007 was filed. A Division Bench of this Court, by a judgment dated 01.04.2008, has set aside the order of the learned single Judge dated 09.04.2007 by allowing the writ appeal; however, giving liberty to the respondents to pass orders taking into consideration the situation now prevailing in the school, particularly, after the retirement of the Headmistress, who was handling the Tamil subject.
3. It was consequent to the said direction of the Division Bench, the 2nd respondent has passed the present impugned order dated 08.09.2008. In the impugned order, which is not an order of transfer and which is an order of re-deployment, it is made clear that in the 3rd respondent School, the total strength of students was only 47; out of whom the strength of students in Classes I to V is 19 and Classes VI to VIII is 28. For the said 47 students, there were 4 graduate teachers, one Secondary Grade Teacger and one Physical Education Teacher and toally, 6 teachers were employed. The impugned order further shows that, on considering the poor strength of the students of the 3rd respondent school, the said 4 graduate teachers have become surplus by virtue of G.O.No.525 dated 29.12.1997. The 2nd respondent has also found that by re-deployment, the existing students of the 3rd respondent school are not going to be affected since the existing teachers can teach Tamil to the students in the above said classes. It is, in view of the same and in order to protect the service conditions of the petitioner, the 2nd respondent has passed the re-deployment order, transferring the petitioner to the Thiruvalluvar Gurukulam Middle School, Saidapet, Chennai-15.
4. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that by virtue of the transfer, the petitioner will be losing her chance of becoming Headmistress of the 3rd respondent school, has no basis. In the circumstance, when the educational authorities have found, taking into consideration the reduction of students’ strength in the school, that necessarily four graduate teachers are to be re-deployed, the same cannot be interfered with by this Court since this Court cannot direct the educational authorities to direct some of the teachers of its choice to teach a particular subject. In educational matters, the courts cannot be expected to interfere in the decision of the educational authorities. In any event, it is not a case where the petitioner’s promotional avenues are affected by the re-deployment. By the concept of re-deployment, the petitioner’s service status is retained. Taking into consideration the fact that the service conditions are not affected by the impugned order of re-deployment, I am of the considered view that the petitioner is not entitled to get any relief, as claimed in the writ petition and the impugned order of the 2nd respondent does not warrant any inference.
Writ petition fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected M.Ps.are closed.
Index: Yes. 31.10.2008 Internet: Yes. gl To 1. The Joint Director of Elementary Education, D.P.I.Campus, Chennai-600 006. 2. The District Elementary Educational Officer, D.P.I.Campus, College Road, Chennai-600 006. 3. The Correspondent/Secretary, Kannappa Nayanar Aided Middle School, Royapuram, Chennai-13. P.JYOTHIMANI, J., gl Order in W.P.No.25779 of 2008 31.10.2008