Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 1232 (MAD)

M. Santhi v. State of Tamil Nadu

2025-03-03

R.N.MANJULA

body2025
ORDER : This Writ Petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the impugned orders passed in Na.Ka.No.072380/W2/E2/2018 dated 26.11.2019 on the file of the 2nd respondent and quash the same and direct the respondents to give effect to the post of Post Graduate Assistant with retrospective effect from 23.12.1989 on transfer of service to the petitioner by applying G.O.Ms.No.720, Education dated 28.04.1981 and also extend all monetary benefits to the petitioner from 23.12.1989. 2. Heard Mr.S.Doraisamy, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mrs.P.Rajarajeswari, learned Government Advocate for the respondents and perused the materials available on record. 3. The petitioner who has been selected as Junior Assistant under Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission Group IV Services on 02.08.1986 has been initially posted in the Medical Department. On 23.12.1989, she got transferred from Medical Department to Education Department in the same post. The petitioner claims that as per the special rules for the Tamil Nadu Higher Secondary Education Services issued in G.O.Ms.No.720, Education, dated 28.04.1981, the post graduate teacher falls under Class II and the method of recruitment is by direct recruitment or recruitment by transfer from Tamil Nadu Education Subordinate Service and if no suitable candidates are available for appointment from the Tamil Nadu Education Subordinate Service, appointment may be made from any other services by transfer. Earlier, the petitioner has filed a Writ Petition in W.P.No.7450 of 2007, by claiming the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.720 dated 28.04.1981 by citing that similar persons have got their P.G.Assistant post by transfer. In the said Writ Petition, the following orders have been passed: "9. Taking note of the aforesaid submission of the petitioner, the Writ Petition is disposed of, with the following observations. While dismissing the writ petition, I make it clear that the dismissal of writ petition will not come in the way of writ petitioner from making any representation to the Government seeking similar treatment like other persons and in such an event, the first respondent is directed to pass orders on such representation on merits and in accordance with law." 4. Thereafter, the petitioner sent a representation and the same was not considered. The petitioner makes comparison to his appointment to the post of P.G.Assistant through direct recruitment by participating in the recruitment conducted by the Teacher Recruitment Board. She retired from service in the year 2020. Thereafter, the petitioner sent a representation and the same was not considered. The petitioner makes comparison to his appointment to the post of P.G.Assistant through direct recruitment by participating in the recruitment conducted by the Teacher Recruitment Board. She retired from service in the year 2020. She had also given a representation stating that she has to be given with the benefit of regularisation in the post of P.G.Assistant on and from 23.12.1989. 5. The petitioner who has been appointed to the post of Junior Assistant in Group IV Services of Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission has been initially posted in the Medical Department and later she got interdepartmental transfer to Education Department. The petitioner claims that her transfer to Education Department itself was only because she was possessing M.Sc., B.Ed. qualification, but it is not true. The inter-departmental transfer was just at the option of the petitioner to interchange department, probably because at the relevant point of time, she might have thought that at some future point of time, she may get the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.720 dated 28.04.1981. So, the transfer to Education Department has not been extended to her just because she had got some higher qualification. On transfer, the petitioner has been assigned with the same post as Junior Assistant as how she was selected through TNPSC Group IV services at the first instance. 6. It might be true that the petitioner has filed a Writ Petition stating that a person similar to her had been given with post of P.G.Assistant through transfer. The petitioner has been making representation all along believing that she might get the post of P.G.Assistant on transfer and appointed in some vacancy. As the petitioner was not accommodated as P.G.Assistant, she had opted to apply through direct recruitment channel when the Teacher Recruitment Board had given notification. She got selected to the post and joined as P.G.Assistant through direct recruitment on 01.09.2008. 7 . After having chosen the direct recruitment channel, the petitioner without any rhyme or reason has given a representation stating that she should be given with regularisation in the post of P.G.Assistant even while she was functioning as Junior Assistant in the Education Department. It is to be noted that the first representation seeking the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.720 itself was dated 16.07.1990. It is to be noted that the first representation seeking the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.720 itself was dated 16.07.1990. But the petitioner had given representation that she should be considered as P.G.Assistant right from the date when she was transferred from Medical Department to Education Department as Junior Assistant. 8. The claim of the petitioner is extraordinary and imaginary apart from tainted with illegality. Once the petitioner had joined as P.G.Assistant through another recruitment on 01.09.2008, her seniority in the said post would be counted only from the date of such appointment as though it was a fresh appointment through direct recruitment and not an appointment by transfer. No doubt, the Government Order issued in G.O.Ms.No.720 dated 28.04.1981 might benefit those persons qualified in Tamil Nadu Education Subordinate Service. But that cannot create a compulsory obligation on the Government that the Government should consider the petitioner for the post of P.G.Assistant and appoint her just because she had the qualification suiting to the post of P.G.Assistant. 9. In the impugned order itself, it has been stated that the petitioner's case could not be considered because there were other candidates and they have been given with the postings and that the petitioner has chosen to come through direct recruitment channel by herself. Even for appointment by transfer, it can only on selection and not by automatic presumption that a Junior Assistant who have got transferred to Education Department have been selected to the post of P.G.Assistant. As the claim of the petitioner is without any basis and irrational, this Writ Petition is liable to be dismissed with costs. 10. In the result, this Writ Petition is dismissed with a cost of Rs.10,000/-.