Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 4420 (MAD)

K. Sivanandharaja v. R. Revathi

2014-11-26

N.PAUL VASANTHAKUMAR, P.R.SHIVAKUMAR

body2014
Judgment N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J. 1. Heard Mr. S. Mani, learned counsel appearing for Mr. M. Hidayathulla Khan, counsel on record for the appellants, by Mr. P. Ganesan, learned counsel for the first respondent and by Mrs. A. Sri Jayanthi, learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents 2 to 4. 2. This writ appeal is filed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 16.08.2011 made in W.P.No.12844 of 2011, which was disposed of along with six other cases. 3. The Department has accepted the order of the learned single Judge in respect of the first respondent as well as the other persons. However, the appellants, who are third persons, got leave from this court to file an appeal and after getting leave, have challenged the order dated 16.08.2011 made in W.P.No.12844/2011. The contention of the appellants that the first respondent having passed +2 in vocational subject of secondary grade teacher training, she could be appointed only as a secondary grade teacher, in terms of the circular issued in G.O.Ms.No.1431 Education Department dated 16.09.1986 and the said certificate obtained by the first respondent, cannot be treated as an equivalent to +2. The first respondent, having passed B.Lit degree based on the Plus two certificate obtained in March 1988, wherein vocational subject is also one among the subjects, cannot be treated as passed +2 in the regular stream. Therefore, the degree obtained by the first respondent, without having passed +2 regular pattern, cannot be treated as a valid qualification for promotion to the post of Headmistress to middle school. 4. The vocational stream in teacher education was introduced by the Government and the Government having accepted the said course as equivalent to diploma in teacher training and the first respondent having passed other subjects in +2, the said certificate is to be treated as valid +2 as well as diploma in teacher education. The first respondent has also passed B.Litt for being promoted as Headmistrees. Considering all the above said facts and circumstances, the learned single Judge has allowed the writ petition along with six other cases. The appellants have also been given promotion as middle school Headmaster/Headmistress. 5. The first respondent has also passed B.Litt for being promoted as Headmistrees. Considering all the above said facts and circumstances, the learned single Judge has allowed the writ petition along with six other cases. The appellants have also been given promotion as middle school Headmaster/Headmistress. 5. In view of the fact that the Government has introduced the vocational stream in +2 pattern, it was treated as equivalent to diploma in Teacher Education and the first respondent having been appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher, the said qualification has to be treated as a pass in +2 as well as diploma in Teacher Education. Hence the contention of the appellants cannot be accepted and the writ appeal deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.