ORDER : The prayer in the writ petition is for a writ of certiorarified mandamus calling for the records connected with the impugned order of promotion of 4th respondent as Middle School Headmaster in Na.Ka. No.1701/A5/ AA5/2012 dated 9.11.2012 passed by the 2nd respondent and quash the same and directing the respondents to promote the petitioner as Middle School Head Master w.e.f. 9.11.2012 with all consequential benefits. 2. The case of the petitioner is that she completed the S.S.L.C under the old pattern in the year 1977 and thereafter, obtained the Teacher Training certificate in Higher Secondary level which is a two years diploma course in Teacher Education in 1979. Thereafter, under Open University system, she completed M.A in History in 1994, then she completed Bachelor of Education course (B.Ed) in 1997 and she also completed Bachelor of Arts in History in 2010. 3. The petitioner with the qualification of old S.S.L.C and Diploma in Teacher Education had been appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher in the respondent's school on 11.6.1985. After having served for long years, she had been promoted as Elementary School Head Master on 21.11.2011 with effect from 19.09.2011, in the said post she had been working. 4. As far as the 4th respondent is concerned, according to the petitioner, she had been appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher on 01.11.1988. Therefore, admittedly she is junior than the petitioner as the petitioner was appointed as Secondary Grade Teacher in 11.6.1985 and therefore, if at all any further promotion to the Middle School Head Master is to be given as per the seniority, only the petitioner had to be considered. 5. However, by the impugned proceedings dated 9.11.2012, the 3rd respondent had given promotion to the 4th respondent as Middle School Head Master by order dated 9.11.2012 with effect from 12.11.2012. Accordingly, the 4th respondent had been given promotion as Middle School Head Master in the only vacancy available in the Municipal Schools at Gudiyatham where both the petitioner and the 4th respondent are working. 6. Even though the petitioner is senior than the 4th respondent and she is also fully qualified to be considered for the promotion to the post of Middle School Head Master prior to the 4th respondent, the 3rd respondent had given promotion to the 4th respondent. By thus, the promotion to the petitioner was denied to the post of Middle School Head Master. By thus, the promotion to the petitioner was denied to the post of Middle School Head Master. Even though the petitioner had given representations in this regard to the respondents on 20.12.2012 and 6.02.2013, the same had not been considered and therefore, the petitioner in the said circumstances, having found no other option except to challenge the promotion given to the 4th respondent through the impugned order had filed this writ petition with the aforesaid prayer. 7. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that though no order denying the promotion to the petitioner had been expressly passed by the official respondents, by passing the impugned order, they have impliedly denied the promotion sought for by the petitioner to the post of Middle School Head Master. 8. After the said impugned promotion given to the 4th respondent when the petitioner requested the official respondents, the reasons as to why her candidature had not been considered for the promotion, the petitioner came to understand the reasons from the official respondents that the petitioner had the qualification of Old S.S.L.C (11 years) and a diploma, thereafter. Therefore, the said Old S.S.L.C plus diploma cannot be treated as a 10 +2 system and therefore, the subsequent U.G decree and P.G degree including the B.Ed degree acquired by the petitioner cannot also be treated as a qualification for consideration to the post of Middle School Head Master. 9. In this regard, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would rely upon the G.O. Ms. No.242 Higher Education B1 Department, dated 18.12.2012, wherein certain qualifications such as 10th standard (S.S.L.C), old S.S.L.C (11 years) and diploma courses etc., had been considered as to whether those qualifications are equivalent to the qualifications of 10 +2 +3 system. In this regard, the learned counsel would draw the attention of this court in paragraph 2 of the said Government Order wherein the relevant portion reads thus, xxx 10. In this regard, the learned counsel would draw the attention of this court in paragraph 2 of the said Government Order wherein the relevant portion reads thus, xxx 10. By relying upon the said G.O as referred to above, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that since the qualification of Old S.S.L.C (11 years) and diploma in 2 years in Teacher Education course and a U.G decree obtained through Open University System were considered to be equivalent to the qualification of 10 +2 +3 and the petitioner is also having the very same qualification of Old S.S.L.C, + two yeas diploma in Teacher training course as well as U.G degree and infact having more qualification, i.e., P.G degree and B.Ed decree, then certainly, the qualifications of the petitioner cannot be said to be a lower qualification than the one to be considered for the post of Middle School Head Master. 11. In view of the said factual position, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that, therefore, being the senior than the 4th respondent, the petitioner should have been considered for promotion to the post of Middle School Head Master, considering the said qualification in the light of the said G.O.Ms.No.242 as referred to above which the respondent having miserably failed. And inspite of the request having been made repeatedly by the petitioner, the mistake committed in respect of the candidature of the petitioner had not so far been rectified and therefore, the impugned promotion given to the 4th respondent without considering the candidature of the petitioner, is totally unjustifiable and hence, the said impugned promotion is liable to be quashed and consequently, the official respondents to be directed to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Middle School Head Master. 12. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the official respondents would contend that even though G.O.Ms.No.242 says that the old SSLC with diploma and a UG qualification obtained through open university system, is equivalent to the qualification of 10 +2 +3 obtained by a candidate for the purpose of promotion, the said G.O came into effect only from 18.12.2012 whereas, the impugned promotion to the fourth respondent had been given on 09.11.2012 itself and therefore, at that point of time, the question of considering the G.O.Ms.No.242 would not have arisen at all. Therefore, only considering the qualification acquired, both by the petitioner as well as the fourth respondent, even though the petitioner was senior to the fourth respondent, promotion was given only to the fourth respondent as the petitioner did not fulfill the qualification on consideration of the promotion to the post of Middle School Head Master. Therefore, the said promotion given through the impugned order cannot be found fault with and the same cannot be assailed by the petitioner merely on the ground that on 18.12.2012, G.O.Ms.No.242 was issued whereby, the equivalence of the qualification of the petitioner was accepted as if she is having equivalent qualification as that of 10 +2 +3. Therefore, the learned Government Advocate would submit that there is no infirmity in the impugned order and therefore, he submits that the same need not be interfered with. 13. This Court has considered the said rival submissions made by both sides. 14. The only controversy to be resolved in this writ petition is that whether the petitioner should be considered for promotion to the post of Middle School Head Master based on her qualification which she acquired long back. 15. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner is having the qualification of old SSLC as well as diploma in teacher education (2 years course) and also UG, PG as well as B.Ed decree obtained thereafter. If at all the reason as presumed and projected by the petitioner for non consideration of her candidature for the post of promotion to Middle School Head Master from the side of the official respondents that the qualification of old SSLC as well as diploma in teacher education shall not be the equivalent qualification for consideration to the post of Middle School Head Master where the requirement is 10 +2 +3 system i.e. X std, +2 Higher Secondary Course as well as degree. Even then by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.242 dated 18.12.2012, the said objection as presumed by the petitioner from the side of the official respondent has been vanished. 16. Even then by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.242 dated 18.12.2012, the said objection as presumed by the petitioner from the side of the official respondent has been vanished. 16. Insofar as the contention of the learned Government Advocate that the G.O.Ms.No.242 was issued only on 18.12.2012, however the promotion to the post of Middle School Head Master was considered and given to the fourth respondent on 09.11.2012, admittedly, before the G.O came into effect, therefore, the effect of the said G.O cannot be put against the fourth respondent and therefore, in that score, the impugned order cannot be assailed is concerned, the argument advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would be that the law is well settled in this regard that once the qualification has been treated as equivalent then, that shall date back from the very date of acquiring such qualification by the candidate concerned. 17. Here in the case in hand, though G.O.Ms.No.242 was issued only on 18.12.2012, the petitioner had acquired all the said qualification i.e., old SSLC, diploma in teacher education as well as UG and PG degrees well before the said G.O and therefore, it is no doubt that at the time of considering the promotion to the post of Middle School Head Master i.e., during November 2012 even in the absence of G.O.Ms.No.242, the petitioner was having the qualification which could have been considered for promotion to the post of Middle School Head Master. 18. Merely, because the G.O was issued only on 18.12.2012, the official respondents cannot take advantage of that and deny the promotion to the petitioner, who is admittedly senior than the fourth respondent as per the seniority list issued as on 01.01.2002 where the name of the petitioner is found at Sl.No.38 whereas the name of the fourth respondent is found at S.No.41. Therefore, the said argument advanced by the learned Government Advocate, cannot have much force to accept. 19. Therefore, the said argument advanced by the learned Government Advocate, cannot have much force to accept. 19. Also the learned counsel for the petitioner would rely upon the Judgment of this Court dated 18.4.2013 made in a batch of cases in W.P.No.28863 of 2012 etc, batch wherein the learned Judge has dealt with exactly the similar situation as number of persons like the petitioner had been denied promotion to the post of Middle School Head Master, Tamil Pandit etc., on the short ground that they have not completed ten years of schooling followed by two years of Higher Secondary course and two years of degree course. In the said Judgment, the learned Judge after considering this issue in the teeth of G.O.Ms.No.242 dated 18.12.2012, has observed as follows: “5. In addition to the above, the Government had also come up with an order in G.O.Ms.No.242, Higher Education Department dated 18.12.2012, i.e., after the pronouncement of the orders of the three learned Judges, holding that a regular Diploma of a duration of three years obtained even in unrelated subjects could be considered as equivalent to a pass in Higher Secondary Course. Therefore, the petitioners are entitled to the claim that they have made. 6. In view of the above, these writ petitions are allowed and the respondents are directed to consider the claim of the petitioners for promotion and pass appropriate orders within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The respondents shall also verify the particulars of the qualifications secured by them, as indicated in the tabular statement. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, MP.Nos. 1 and 2 of 2012 and M.P.No.1 of 2013 are closed.” 20. This Court has been informed by the learned counsel for the petitioner that as against the said Judgment though intra-court appeal was filed by the official respondents therein, during the pendency of the writ appeal since promotions had been given pursuant to the direction issued by the learned Judge in the order referred to above, those writ appeals were dismissed as infructuous. When that being the position, the only presumptive reason as has been projected by the petitioner for non consideration of her candidature for promotion to the post of Middle School Head Master is no more available and based on which the promotion to the petitioner cannot be denied or delayed. 21. Even though two representations have been made by the petitioner subsequent to the impugned promotion given to the fourth respondent quoting the import of G.O.Ms.No.242, the official respondents seems to have not considered and the issue is still pending with them. 22. In the circumstances, this Court is of the considered view that without disturbing the promotion given to the fourth respondent as this Court is not able to hear the views of the fourth respondent as she has not been present in Court inspite of the notice having been served on her, the needful shall be directed to be done insofar as the claim of the petitioner is concerned by the official respondents in the light of G.O.Ms.No.242 and the qualification the petitioner is already having. 23. Resultantly, the following orders are passed in this writ petition: (i) The second and third respondents are hereby directed to consider the request of the petitioner as per her representations dated 20.12.2012 and 06.2.2013 for giving promotion to her to the post of Middle School Head Master by taking into account, the import of G.O.Ms.No.242, Higher Education Department dated 18.12.2012 as well as the qualification of the petitioner, namely, old SSLC, diploma in Education and UG as well as B.Ed and PG degrees and also taking into account the seniority of the petitioner which according to the proceedings issued by the third respondent is above the fourth respondent and accordingly, pass orders for giving promotion to the petitioner as Middle School Head Master from the date actually, the promotion to the post of Middle School Head Master becomes due as per her seniority with all consequential service benefits within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 24. With these direction, the writ petition is disposed of.