ORDER : 1. The issue in the present civil appeals is the appointment of the contesting respondent herein as B.T. Assistant (Science) in Sri M.K.V. Sala Higher Secondary School, S. Melappatti (Madurai). Approval therefor was sought on 29.11.2008 from the District Educational Officer, Usilampatti, Madurai Distt. The said authority returned the proposal on the ground that the qualifications possessed by the contesting respondent was that of B.Sc., Industrial Chemistry which was not considered equal to B.Sc. Chemistry as per the Rules and Regulations of the Teachers’ Recruitment Board which is tasked with the recruitment of teachers for Government High As well as Higher Secondary Schools. 2. A writ petition bearing No. 467 of 2009 was filed before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. It was observed by the learned Single Judge that prescribing qualification for a particular post is squarely within the domain of the Government. The qualification as laid down for the post of B.T. Assistant (Science) is a degree in any of the disciplines, namely, Physics, Chemistry, Botany and Zoology. Clearly, none of those were possessed by the contesting respondent. He had submitted his eligibility for such position on the basis of certificate issued by Kamaraj University dated 11.12.2008 which, in the opinion offered by the Registrar of such University had no binding on educational authorities. As such the writ petition was dismissed. 3. In the appeals preferred thereagainst, the Division Bench observed that since the school in which the contesting respondent sought appointment was a private school, it would not be governed by the Rules and Regulations/guidelines of the Teachers Recruitment Board. Appointment of teachers in private schools is governed by Tamil Nadu Recognized Private School (Regulation) Act, 1973 and Rules made thereunder. It was observed that the qualifications provided thereunder were only of B.A. or B.Sc. degree with B.Ed. And as such, with no restrictions to particular disciplines such as Botany, Physics, Chemistry or Zoology the contesting respondent's application for B.T. Assistant ought to have been entertained. As such it was held that the 5th respondent before the High Court, namely, P. Mahalingam, Proforma respondent herein, who had been appointed in place of the contesting respondent, could no longer continue and the concerned District Education Officer was directed to give approval to the appointment of the contesting respondent in the aforesaid school. 4. As such it was held that the 5th respondent before the High Court, namely, P. Mahalingam, Proforma respondent herein, who had been appointed in place of the contesting respondent, could no longer continue and the concerned District Education Officer was directed to give approval to the appointment of the contesting respondent in the aforesaid school. 4. In the aforesaid, we are of the considered view that no ground has been made out for this Court to interfere with the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Madras. 5. The appeals are dismissed. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.