IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25.11.2009
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUDHAKAR
W.P.No. 16837 of 2003
......
P.Augustine Arul Philip ...Petitioner.
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by Secretary to Government
Social Welfare Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai 600 005.
2.District Rehabilitation Officer
Rehabilitation Centre,
Tirunelveli.
3.District Educational Officer
Kovilpatti.
4.The Manager
TDTA Higher Secondary
Secondary Special Schools & Teacher Training Institutes,
Diocesan office,
Palayamkottai.
5.Florence Swainson Higher Secondary
School for the Deaf, Palayamkottai,
Rep. by its Correspondent.
6.Mary Hepsibha ...Respondents.
PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the 4th respondent relating to order dated 01.06.2003 appointing the 6th respondent as the Headmistress of Florence Swanison Higher Secondary School for the deaf, Plalyamkottai and quash the same and direct the respondents 1-5 to appoint the petitioner as the Headmaster of Florence Swainson Higher Secondary School for the deaf, Palayamkottai
For Petitioner : Mr.R.Amardeep
For R -1 to R -3 : Mr.A.Suresh
Government Advocate
For R 4 to R 6 : Mr.K.Ravichandrababu
O R D E R
The petitioner teacher has filed the writ petition aggrieved by the appointment of respondent No.6 as a Headmistress of Florence Swanison Higher Secondary School for the Deaf, Plalyamkottai the 5th respondent School, by an order dated 01.06.2003.
2.This case of the petitioner is that he should have been considered to the post of Headmaster to the said School and his claim on merits has been over looked and the 6th respondent has been appointed. In the writ petition, the proceedings of the 4th respondent resulting the appointment of 6th respondent are challenged on the various grounds which includ the comparative merits of the parties in respect of qualifications, seniority and merit. The writ petition was admitted and notice was issued to the respondent. The contesting 6th respondent has filed a counter.
3.At the time of final hearing of the writ petition, it stated that the writ petitioner was previously working as a Headmaster in Higher Secondary School run by the same management at Kailasapuram, Thuthukudi District. In such view of the matter, the petitioner having been appointed as a Headmaster by the same management, no further adjudication is required in the present writ petition. Today the petitioner, has instructed his counsel Shri R.Amardeep to plead before this Court that he should be transferred to the 5th respondent School as and when a vacancy arises. The reason being the petitioner’s wife is working in the 5th respondent School.
4.The petitioner is at liberty to make a representation to the appropriate School authority for transfer as per law. Such request if made will be considered by respondents as per law. The official respondents can also consider the payment of all or any pending amounts withheld by the 5th respondent, if any. The writ petition is disposed of with the above observation. No costs.
25.11.2009
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
vsm
R.SUDHAKAR,J.
vsm
To
1.The Secretary
Government of Tamil Nadu
Social Welfare Department,
Fort St. George, Chennai 600 005.
2.District Rehabilitation Officer
Rehabilitation Centre,
Tirunelveli.
3.District Educational Officer
Kovilpatti.
W.P.No.16837 of 2003
4.The Manager
TDTA Higher Secondary
Secondary Special Schools &
Teacher Training Institutes,
Diocesan office,
Palayamkottai.
5.Florence Swainson Higher Secondary
School for the Deaf, Palayamkottai,
Rep. by its Correspondent.
25.11.2009
19.08.2009.