JUDGMENT 1. The petitioner seeks for issuance of writ of mandamus to direct the respondents 3 and 4 to consider the appeal made by the petitioner dated 10.01.2008 and 21.01.2008 within a time frame and consequently to forebear the fifth respondent from filling up the post of B.T. Assistant by direct recruitment without considering the claim of the petitioner for promotion as per Rule 15(4) of the Tamil Nadu Private School Regulation Rules, 1974 (in short "Rules"). 2. The petitioner belongs to Schedule Caste Community. She passed B.Sc. (Physics), M.Sc. (Physics) and B.Ed. She registered her name and qualification in the employment exchange. 3. Diploma in Teacher Education (D.T.Ed.) is the qualification prescribed for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher. However, there were no qualified hands available for appointment to the post of Secondary Grade Teacher in the reserved category of SC/ST during the period from 1997-2002. 4. In these circumstances, the Government issued orders in G.O.Ms.No.301, School Education Department, dated 15.10.1999, in respect of Aided Schools, permitting to fill up the Secondary Grade Teacher posts with Graduate Assistants through employment exchange, after obtaining Nil report of candidates with D.T.Ed. qualification. 5. While the Graduate Assistants were appointed as Secondary Grade Teachers under G.O.Ms.No.301, a condition was made that they could not claim incentive increment for higher qualification and further they shall not claim promotion to the post of B.T. Assistant directly or as a special case. Further, as per the Government order, Graduate Assistants appointed as Secondary Grade Teachers would be given Child Psychology Training for a period of one month before regular appointment. 6. The petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher on 25.02.2002 under G.O.Ms.No.301, referred to above. 7. The Government issued G.O.Ms.No.100, School Education Department, dated 27.06.2003 stating that the Secondary Grade Teachers taking classes for VI to VIII would be upgraded automatically to the post of B.T. Assistant as and when the vacancy arises. Subsequently, those junior Graduate Assistants were made regular B.T. Assistants by way of Government Order. 8. Subsequently, in the year 2004, a vacancy arose to the post of B.T. Assistant (Science) in respect of Classes VI to VIII. Instead of giving promotion to the petitioner, as per Rule 15(4) of the Rules, the fifth respondent School filled up the vacancy by directly recruiting one Mr. S. Jeyakumar on 24.06.2004. 9. 8. Subsequently, in the year 2004, a vacancy arose to the post of B.T. Assistant (Science) in respect of Classes VI to VIII. Instead of giving promotion to the petitioner, as per Rule 15(4) of the Rules, the fifth respondent School filled up the vacancy by directly recruiting one Mr. S. Jeyakumar on 24.06.2004. 9. Likewise, another vacancy, that arose in the year 2005, was again filled up by direct recruitment by appointing one Mr. K. Sethuramalingam on 15.09.2005, without promoting the petitioner under Rule 15(4). 10. In the year 2007, when a vacancy arose, the petitioner made a representation to the fifth respondent school to consider her for promotion to the post of B.T. Assistant (Science) in the existing vacancy. However, the fifth respondent School issued a reply dated 12.01.2008 stating that since she was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher under G.o.Ms.No.301, she was not eligible for promotion to the post of B.T. Assistant forever. 11. In these circumstances, the fifth respondent School again filled up a vacancy that arose in the year 2007, by directly recruiting one Mr. N. Dharmarajan in January, 2008, without promoting the petitioner. 12. But, this time, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the fourth respondent / the District Educational Officer, Mayiladuthurai, on 21.01.2008. Based on the appeal, the third respondent called for certain particulars from the fourth respondent and the same was duly submitted by the fourth respondent on 05.08.2008. However, the respondents 3 and 4 have not passed any orders on her appeal. 13. Thereafter, the petitioner sent a letter dated 27.08.2012 to the first respondent / the Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Chennai, stating that the appeal preferred by her was not disposed of. A copy of the said letter dated 27.08.2012 was sent to the second respondent / the Director of School Education, Chennai. 14. When the appeal is still pending against the direct recruitment of one Mr. Dharmarajan as B.T. Assistant, without promoting the petitioner, the fifth respondent School again sought to fill another vacancy by issuing advertisement calling for application from the open market. 15. In these circumstances, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the aforesaid prayer. 16. 14. When the appeal is still pending against the direct recruitment of one Mr. Dharmarajan as B.T. Assistant, without promoting the petitioner, the fifth respondent School again sought to fill another vacancy by issuing advertisement calling for application from the open market. 15. In these circumstances, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the aforesaid prayer. 16. This Court, while admitting the writ petition, granted interim injunction restraining the respondents from filling up the vacancy to the post of B.T. Assistant by way of direct recruitment in the fifth respondent School, pursuant to the Newspaper Advertisement dated 24.08.2012. 17. Both the department as well as the fifth respondent School filed a petition to vacate the interim injunction granted by this Court on 11.09.2012, wherein it is averred that the petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher as per G.O.Ms.No.301, dated 15.10.1999 and therefore, she is not entitled for promotion to the post of B.T. Assistant. 18. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied if she is appointed in the existing vacancy, for which, a newspaper advertisement dated 24.08.2012 was issued by the fifth respondent School. 19. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent School submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to be considered for promotion, since she was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher under G.O.Ms.No.301, referred to above. 20. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 4 has also made submission on the same line, as that of the learned counsel for the fifth respondent. 21. I have considered the rival submission made on either side. 22. It is not in dispute that the vacancies for the post of B.T. Assistant, that arose for the years 2004, 2005 and 2007, were filled up by the fifth respondent School by way of direct recruitment, without promoting the petitioner under Rule 15 (4) of the Rules. The reason for not considering the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher under G.O.Ms.No.301, referred to above. 23. In my view, the respondents are not correct in not considering the petitioner for promotion to the post of B.T. Assistant, citing G.O.Ms.No.301 as reason. The reason for not considering the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher under G.O.Ms.No.301, referred to above. 23. In my view, the respondents are not correct in not considering the petitioner for promotion to the post of B.T. Assistant, citing G.O.Ms.No.301 as reason. The said GO only states that at the initial appointment, though the candidates are having the qualification of B.Ed., they are appointed only as Secondary Grade Teacher and they could not claim promotion to the post of B.T. Assistant directly. It does not mean that whenever vacancy arises, such Graduate Assistants could not claim promotion based on their seniority. 24. In fact, the Director of Elementary Education issued proceedings dated 26.12.2000 stating that Graduate Assistant appointed as Second Grade Teacher shall be given promotion to the post of B.T. Assistant based on the seniority in the post of Secondary Grade Teacher. 25. In this case, the petitioner claims promotion based on the seniority alone. At this juncture, it is relevant to extract Rule 15 (4)(ii) of the Rules. "Rule 15-- Qualification, conditions of service of teachers and other persons. (1) .................... (2) .................... (3) .................... (4) .................... i. .................... ii. If no qualified and suitable candidate is available by method (i) above, -- a) Appointment of other persons employed in that school, provided they are fully qualified to hold the post of teachers; b) Appointment of teachers from any other school; c) Direct recruitment. In that case of appointment from any other school or by direct recruitment, the school committee shall obtain the prior permission of the District Educational Officer in respect of Pre-primary, Primary and Middle School and that of the Chief Educational Officer in respect of High Schools and Higher Secondary Schools, Teachers' Training Institutions setting out the reasons for such appointment. In respect of corporate body running more than one school, the schools under that body shall be treated as one unit for purpose of this rule.] d) Appointment to the post of Headmaster of Higher Second School shall be made by the method specified in clause (ii) either from the category of Headmasters of High Schools or Teachers' Training Institutes or from the category of Post-Graduate Assistants in academic subjects or Post-Graduate Assistants in Languages provided they possess the prescribed qualifications." 26. The above said statutory Rule makes it clear that if qualified teachers are available in the School, the vacancies shall be filled up by way of promotion and if no qualified and suitable candidate is available, then only direct recruitment shall be resorted to. 27. It is not the case of the respondents that the petitioner is not a suitable candidate and it is also not their case that the petitioner does not possess required qualification. 28. Therefore, in my view, the respondents are not correct in not considering the petitioner for appointment to the post of B.T. Assistant under Rule 15(4) (ii) of the Rules. 29. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner does not want to have confrontation with the fifth respondent School and if they appoint her in the existing vacancy, that is available now, the petitioner is not interested in pursuing her appeal against the direct recruitment of Mr. Dharmarajan. It is also stated that there is no other Secondary Grade Teacher available in the School, who is senior to the petitioner. 30. In view of the aforesaid observations, the writ petition is disposed with a direction to the fifth respondent School to appoint the petitioner as B.T. Assistant in the existing vacancy, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondents 1 to 4 are directed to approve the same, when the promotion is given to the petitioner as B.T. Assistant. In view of the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the authorities need not proceed further with the appeal preferred by her, against the earlier direct recruitment made by the fifth respondent School. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.