Judgment : 1. The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition seeking a writ of mandamus to direct respondents 1 to 3 to upgrade the post of Physical Education Teacher held by him in the 6th respondent School to the post of Physical Director Grade-I from the year 1991, the day when he qualified himself with post graduation degree in Physical Education or from 29.12.1997, the date of G.O.Ms. No. 525, with seniority and all attendant benefits. 2. The undisputed facts are that the petitioner joined the services of the 6th respondent School as Physical Education Teacher on 01.10.1977 and at the time of filing of the writ petition, he was holding the said post in the same 6th respondent School. The 6th respondent School is a Religious Aided Minority School, which started to function as Higher Secondary School right from the year 1978. 3. The case of the petitioner is that the total strength of the students of the school is more than 1000 and hence based on the students strength, the 6th respondent school has requested the 2nd respondent to upgrade the post of Physical Education Teacher held by him to that of Physical Director Grade I, since he is the senior most Physical Education Teacher with post graduation degree. Further, as per G.O.Ms. No. 525, Education Department, dated 29.12.1997, the school is eligible to have 3 posts of Physical Education Teacher upto High School level and one Physical Director Grade I for Higher Secondary level. It is the further case of the petitioner that since he is fully qualified with post graduation degree in Physical Education in terms of the earlier G.O.Ms. No. 720, Education Department, dated 28.04.1981 also, he should have been granted the post of Physical Director Grade I. However, the same has not been done. Further, according to the petitioner, though several representations were sent, in respect of the said issue, no action has been taken on the same. Hence, this present writ petition has been filed. 4. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit stating that the students’ strength of the 6th respondent School from 6th to 10th standard is 1027 and 352 is the strength of the students from 11th and 12th standards put together. Hence, this present writ petition has been filed. 4. The respondents have filed a counter affidavit stating that the students’ strength of the 6th respondent School from 6th to 10th standard is 1027 and 352 is the strength of the students from 11th and 12th standards put together. Further, the respondents have contended that since the School does not have more than 400 students in the XI and XII Standards, there is no need for the Physical Director post. Admittedly, there are three Physical Education Teachers and there is no need to upgrade the post to that of Director as the strength of students in Class XI and XII is less than 400. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner drew the attention of this Court through the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules”), particularly Rule 3(c) & (d), which read as follows:- “3. STAGES OF EDUCATION: . (a) … (b) …. (c) Middle Schools: The Middle Schools shall consist of standards I to VIII or Standards VI to VIII or (d) (i) High Schools: The High Schools shall consist of Standards I to X or VI to X or IX to X. (ii) Higher Secondary Schools: The Higher Secondary Schools shall consist of Standards I to XII, VI to XII or IX to XII.” Relying on the above provisions, the learned counsel would submit that the Higher Secondary Schools mean students consisting of Standards IX to XII and hence the 6th respondent school is having students’ strength of 1027 in respect of classes 6th to 10th standard and 352 in respect of classes from 11th and 12th standards and therefore, the school is eligible for a Physical Director post. 6. That apart, the learned counsel for the petitioner has also drew the attention of this Court the order of this Court dated 21.12.2009 passed in W.P. No. 35922 of 2005, wherein this Court has held that in order to give realistic interpretation of clause 4 of G.O.Ms. No. 525, School Education Department, dated 29.12.1997, the student population should not be less than 400 would mean that the total strength of the higher secondary school and not restricted only to 11th and 12th standards. 7. No. 525, School Education Department, dated 29.12.1997, the student population should not be less than 400 would mean that the total strength of the higher secondary school and not restricted only to 11th and 12th standards. 7. Besides, the learned counsel also placed reliance on the order of this Court dated 29.06.2011 made in W.P. No. 9920 of 2011, wherein this Court considered the similar issue and issued direction to the respondents therein to pass appropriate orders, keeping in mind the order of this Court dated 21.12.2009 passed in W.P. No. 35922 of 2005 cited supra, in terms of G.O.Ms. No. 525, as the total students strength of the school therein was more than 400. The operative portion of the said order reads as follows: “Since the petitioner is claiming that the fourth respondent-school, where the students strength is more than 400 is Standards IX to XII all these years from 1.6.1998 onwards, the petitioner is permitted to make a representation before the respondents 1 to 3 through the fourth respondent pointing out the students strength in each year and the third respondent is directed to verify the strength of the fourth respondent school and forward the recommendations to the second respondent within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of representation from the petitioner. The second respondent is directed to forward the same to the first respondent for passing appropriate orders. In case, the fourth respondent is having more than 400 students in Standards IX to XII, necessary order is directed to be passed by the first respondent bearing in mind the order passed by this Court stated supra, within a period of three months from the date of proposal forwarded by the second respondent.” 8. I have heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. 9. Useful reference can be made to the relevant portions of G.O.Ms. No. 525, School Education (D1) Department dated 29.12.1997 which are extracted below:- “5. (III) HIGH SCHOOLS (Standards IX to X) (a) … (b) … (c) When the strength in classes VI to X in High Schools exceeds 250, one post of Physical Education Teacher will be sanctioned and for every additional strength of 300, one additional post of Physical Education Teacher will be sanctioned subject to a maximum of 3.” (IV) HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOLS (11th and 12th Standards) (a) … (b) …. (c) … (d) … (e) … (f) For Schools with a strength of over 400 one post of Physical Director will be given upgradation of existing posts of Physical Education Teacher.” 10. I find much force in the contention of the learned counsel for the writ petitioner. It is an admitted fact that the 6th respondent school originally had 11th standard till 1977-78 and it was upgraded as Higher Secondary School in 1978, in view of introduction of + 2 standard. There is no dispute with regard to the total strength of students more particularly in view of admission in the counter at page No.4, wherein the total strength of students is mentioned as 1419 (1027+392) from classes 6th standard to 12th standard. 11. Hence, in view of a definitions extracted supra and giving realistic interpretation to clause 4 of G.O.M.S. No. 525, School Education Department, dated 29.12.1997 that the student population should not be less than 400 would mean that the total strength of the higher secondary school and not restricted only to 11th and 12th standards, since the total strength of the students of the 6th respondent School has crossed more than 400, the contention of the learned Government Advocate that Physical Director post would be sanctioned/upgraded only if the student strength is more than 400 in 11th and 12th standards cannot be accepted. 12. At time of argument, it was stated by the learned counsel on either side that the petitioner has attained the age of superannuation on 31.05.2014, during the pendency of the writ petition. 13. In view of the above, the writ petition is allowed. The respondents 1 to 3 to upgrade the post of Physical Education Teacher held by the Petitioner in the sixth Respondent School to the post of Physical Director Grade-I from 29.12.1997, the date of G.O.Ms. No.525, School Education Department. Since the petitioner has got to succeed, he is entitled to all the benefits, which are notionally be calculated and paid to him, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs.