Judgment 1. The petitioner N. Elangovan, filed the present writ petition seeking a writ of certiorarified Mandamus to call for the entire records connected with the impugned order passed by the 1st respondent in Letter No. 40, School Education Department (H2) dated 07.03.2001 and the consequential order of the 3rd respondent in Na. Ka. No. 6908/A2/2008 dated 05.09.2008 and quash the same and direct the respondents to approve the appointment of the petitioner as B.T. Assistant with effect from 212. 1996 in the 4th respondent school with all consequential benefits. 2. The petitioner has passed B.A. (Indian Culture) at Bharathidasan university during the year 1984-1987 and subsequently qualified in M.A. (Philosophy) during the year 1987-1989 and also passed B.Ed during the year 1989-1990. The Bharathidasan University has issued a certificate certifying that B.A. (Indian Culture) is equivalent to B.A. (History). Subsequently a vacancy arose in the 4th respondent School, kassimia Higher Secondary School, Rajagiri, Thanjavur due to superannation of one Sri. Thomas. The 4th respondent, being a minority institution, appointed the petitioner in that retirement vacancy on 212. 1996 as B.T. Assistant, From the date of appointment, the petitioner has been continuously working to the satisfaction of his superiors in the 4th respondent school. After the appointment of the petitioner, the 4th respondent school submitted a proposal seeking approval of the petitioner’s appointment, to the 3rd respondent, the District Educational Officer, Thanjavur, but the same was rejected by an order dated 26.08.1997 on the ground that the petitioner did not possess B.A. (History) qualification and further stated that the aforesaid teacher, Thiru, Thomas, had not been granted extension of service till the end of the academic year. 3. The question that arises for determination is whether the B.A. (Indian Culture) degree obtained form Barathidasan University during the year 1984-1987 by the petitioner is equivalent to the B.A. (History) or not. 4. To assert the correctness of the order passed by the 3rd respondent, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a letter written by the Registrar of Bharathidasan University dated 110. 1997 by which communication it was informed that the degree, .B.A. (Indian Culture) obtained by the petitioner N. Elangovan, is equivalent to B.A. (History) course, for the purpose of appointment. To assert the correctness of the order passed by the 3rd respondent, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that a letter written by the Registrar of Bharathidasan University dated 110. 1997 by which communication it was informed that the degree, .B.A. (Indian Culture) obtained by the petitioner N. Elangovan, is equivalent to B.A. (History) course, for the purpose of appointment. When the Bharathidasan Univesity has certified by their communication that B.A (Indian Culture) should be treated as equal to B.A. (History), the 3rd respondent, without considering the document issued by the Bharathidasan University, certifying that B.A. (Indian Culture) course is equivalent to .B.A. (History) course, has wrongly declined to grant approval to the petitioner’s appointment. Further learned counsel brought to the notice of the court an order passed by the Government in G.O.Ms. No. 406 dated 21.04.1993 by which the Government has granted approval by treating even B.A. (Economics) as equivalent to B.A. (History), if history is taken as one of the subjects in B.A. (Economics). Whileso, the petitioner has already obtained a certificate issued by the Bharathidasan Unviersity certifying that B.A. (Indian Culture) is equivalent to B.A. History course. Therefore, it was submitted that the rejection order passed by the third respondent stating that the petitioner who qualified only in B.A. (Indian Culture), which cannot be considered as equivalent to B.A. (History), cannot be sustained. 5. Respondents 1 to 3 have relied on a copy of the Government Letter No. 40 (School Education) dated 07.03.2001 stating that the B.A. Degree in Indian Culture could not be treated as equivalent to B.A. (History) Course. Therefore, the rejection order passed by the 3rd respondent is in accordance with law. 6. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side. 7. The question in the present writ petition is whether the petitioner’s B.A. Degree in Indian Culture is equivalent to B.A. (History) course, when the University in which the petitioner has acquired the qualification had already issued a letter certifying that the B.A. (Indian Culture) is equivalent to B.A. ( History) course. The Government has also considered in another case that even persons with B.A. (Economics)degree, who had taken History as one of the subjects in the said course, those persons with B.A. (Economics) degree should also be treated as equivalent to B.A. (History) degree. The petitioner has also produced an order of this Court in W.P. No. 4896 of 1999 dated 02.08.2000. The petitioner has also produced an order of this Court in W.P. No. 4896 of 1999 dated 02.08.2000. In paragraph 11 of the order passed by this Court in the above said writ petition, identical question has already been considered and it was held thus:- “At the same time, it has to be pointed out that the respondents themselves have referred the petitioner’s degree through the Director to the state Government to evaluate his degree qualification as to whether the degree qualification acquired by him in Indian Culture is equivalent to History. As seen from the counter affidavit, the matter is still under the active consideration of the Government.” 8. The issue raised in the present writ petition had already been considered and concluded by this Court saying that B.A. (Indian Culture) is equivalent to B.A. (History). Therefore this Court is of the view that the petitioner, who obtained B.A. Degree in Indian Culture, is qualified to be appointed to the post of B.T. Assistant and as the petitioner had already been appointed by the 4th respondent school, the order passed by the 3rd respondent rejecting the proposal made by the 4th respondent school seeking approval of the petitioner’s appointment to the 3rd respondent school cannot be countenanced. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the 3rd respondent, the District Educational Officer refusing/rejecting the proposal sent by the 4th respondent on the ground that the B.A. (Indian culture) cannot be considered as equivalent to B.A. (History) course is not legally sustainable, in view of the certificate issued by the Bharathidasan University as well as the order passed by this court in W.P. No. 4896 of 1999. On that basis the writ petition is allowed by setting aside the impugned order. Consequently the 3rd respondent is directed to approve the appointment of the petitioner as B.T. Assistant with effect from 212. 1996 in the 4th respondent school with all consequential benefits within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 9. The writ petition is allowed. No costs.