Madras High Court
A. Mohammed Appas vs L.S.Churchil Chinnaiah on 21 March, 2025
Author: N.Anand Venkatesh
Bench: N. Anand Venkatesh
1/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Orders Reserved on : 09.07.2025
Pronouncing orders on : 15.07.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
Review Application Nos.170, 171 and 172 of 2025
Rev.A.No.170 of 2025
1.A. Mohammed Appas
2.A. Bharathi Lakshmi
3.J. Dhanalakshmi
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. L.S.Churchil Chinnaiah
2.M.Selvarajan
3.P.Nagalakshmi
4.R.Megala
5.M.Kavitha
6.E.Shakunthala
7.S.Saraswathi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
2/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
8.D.Vijayalakshmi
9.R.Hemavathi
10.P.Venkatesan
11.R.Saravanan
12.V.Thenmozhi
13.K.Ramar
14.J.Seyed Mohudoom Beevi
15.K.Sutha
16.V.Kohilavani
17.B.Dhandapani
18.V.Murugalakshmi
19.P.Mariammal Paramasivan
20.G.Gnanaprathayini
21.S.Sumathi
22.M.Nalini
23.P.Mageshwari
24.R.Padmavathy
25.S.Priyanka
26.R.Aruna
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
3/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
27.K.Parimala
28.N.Thambuswamy
29.G.Mathavaraj
30.J P.Ravi
31.S.Preetha
32.K.Sulochana
33.M.Thangadurai
34.A.Amutha
35.R.Anbu
36.M.Janaki
37.N.Usharani
38.R K.Merlin Rajini
39.N.Deepa
40.K C.Janani
41.K.Muppidathi @ Selvarani
42.S.Uma Maheswari
43.M.Ganesan
44.K.Gayathri
45.M.Subramani
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
4/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
46.G.Rosita Rexalin
47.V.Kavitha
48.T.Anandhi
49.J.Indumathi
50.A.Rameshkumar
51.G.Vinoth Kumar
52.N.Vijayamala
53.M.Subramani
54.J.R.Srinivasan
55.A.Muthuameena
56.K.Udhayakumar
57.S.Soundararajan
58.P S.Thyagarajan
59.A.Nirmala
60.K.Jayaguru
61.S.Michel
62.T.Ganesan
63.V.Buvaneshwari
64.P.Krishna Poongothai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
5/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
65.T.Livingta
66.R.Umagowri
67.A.Raju
68.B.Raveendiran
69.P.G.Saranbabu
70.V.Anitha
71.D.Radha
72.S.Deepa
73.P.Kokila
74.S.Malarselvi
75.K.Sekar
76.P.Anbarasu
77.M.Kanagasabapathy
78.M.Sathiyakeerthi
79.A.Kasinathan
80.H.Mohamedumar
81.M.Pragadeeswaran
82.C.Thaiyalnayaki
83.K.Concelia
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
6/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
84.C.Vijayalakshmi
85.S.Amutha Rajeswari
86.N.Venkatalakshmi
87.N.Somasundaram
88.R.Jayabarathi
89.B.Jaya Sutha
90.G.Kalpana
91.V.Kanagaraj
92.T.Murugesan
93.C S.Thirunavukkarasu
94.B.Mariarosalin
95.M.Karthika
96.D.Jeyaraj
97.U.Marsiha begum
98.S.Barani
99.S.Nishanthi
100.M.Boomah Devi
101.P.Senthilkumar
102.K.Arunnehru
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
7/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
103.V.Kalaiselvan
104.C.Maruthuraj
105.S.Sivagami
106.K.Shabina Banu
107.T.Geetha
108.A.Saravanakumar
109.J.Sebastin Anbu Raj
110.S.Silambuselvi
111.D.Chitra
112.S.Sathiya
113.S.Balamurugan
114.C.Thambidurai
115.P.Rajini
116.P.Srividhya
117.G.Umamaheswari
118.M.Kalaiyarasi
119.U.Arulanandham
120.M.Muthukrishnan
121.M.Shanbagavalli
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
8/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
122.S.Uthirapathi
123.N.Purusothaman
124.G.Raja
125.R.Gowri
126.L.Balaji
127.P.Rajkumar
128.K.Maheswari
129.K.Sudhamathi
130.P.Kavitha
131.R.Tamilarasi
132.P.Prema
133.R.Manikandan
134.L .Rajalakshmi
135.T.Anbazhagan
136.R.Vetriselvan
137.A.Ezhilarasi
138.P.Ramalakshmi
139.V.Navaneeth
140.K.Gowri
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
9/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
141.R.Mahesh
142.S.Jareen Banu
143.K.Kannan
144.N.Prema
145.S.Sumathi (Deceased)
146.R.Sangeetha
147.A.Gnana Rosy
148.K.Menaka
149.R.Selvakumar
150.G.Lakshmi
151.M.Arulmozhi
152.R.Saranraj
153.S.Suseela
154.R.Govindarasu
155.V.Malarvizhi
156.N.Jayanthi
157.M.Kalpana
158.T.Nithya
159.P.Sumathi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
10/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
160.A.Pushparaju
161.S.Syed Yusuff
162.K.R.Ganesan
163.R.Selvamani
164.P.Thangamani
165.P.Rajkumar
166.P.Tharani
167.K.Jegatheeswari
168.N.Senthilkumar
169.B.Meenasaranya
170.A.Usha
171.G.Sangareswari
172.N.Veerasamy
173.S.Kamalasridevi
174.R.TamilSelvi
175.B.Esakkimuthu
176.D.M.Rama
177.R.Shrijayanthi
178.K.Kalaivani
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
11/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
179.T.Ganga Parameswari
180.M.Brammasakthi
181.S.Amuthalakshmi
182.L.Raveendra Kumar
183.P.Kalaichelvi
184.M.Krishna Moorthy
185.R.Selvaraj
186.S.Jothi
187.S.Rathivinaisha
188.P.Kuppuraj
189.K.Senthil Sevugapandian
190.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Rep. By its Principal Secretary to Government,
School Education Department.
Fort St. George. Chennai -600 009
191.The Commissioner of School Education,
DPI Campus,
College Road, Chennai -600 006.
192.The Joint Director of School Education (Personnel),
(Higher Secondary) D.P.I. Campus,
College Road, Chennai -600 006.
Respondent(s)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
12/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
PRAYER Review Application filed under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section
114 of C.P.C., to review the order made in W.P.No.9011 of 2022 dated
21.03.2025 by reviewing that the post of typists is also eligible for inclusion
within 2% set apart for the post of BT Assistants.
For Applicant(s): Mrs.Dakshayani Reddy for
Ms.S.Suneetha
For Respondent(s): Mrs.N.Kavitha Rameshwar
for R1 to R189
Mr.P.S.Raman
Advocate General assisted by
Mrs.S.Mythreye Chandru
Special Government Pleader
for R190 to R192
Rev.A.No.171 of 2025
1.The Principal Secretary to Government,
State of Tamil Nadu,
School Education Department.
Fort St. George. Chennai -600 009
2.The Commissioner of School Education,
DPI Campus,
College Road, Chennai -600 006.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
13/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
3.The Joint Director of School Education (Personnel),
(Higher Secondary) D.P.I. Campus,
College Road, Chennai -600 006.
Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. L.S.Churchil Chinnaiah
2.M.Selvarajan
3.P.Nagalakshmi
4.R.Megala
5.M.Kavitha
6.E.Shakunthala
7.S.Saraswathi
8.D.Vijayalakshmi
9.R.Hemavathi
10.P.Venkatesan
11.R.Saravanan
12.V.Thenmozhi
13.K.Ramar
14.J.Seyed Mohudoom Beevi
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
14/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
15.K.Sutha
16.V.Kohilavani
17.B.Dhandapani
18.V.Murugalakshmi
19.P.Mariammal Paramasivan
20.G.Gnanaprathayini
21.S.Sumathi
22.M.Nalini
23.P.Mageshwari
24.R.Padmavathy
25.S.Priyanka
26.R.Aruna
27.K.Parimala
28.N.Thambuswamy
29.G.Mathavaraj
30.J P.Ravi
31.S.Preetha
32.K.Sulochana
33.M.Thangadurai
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
15/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
34.A.Amutha
35.R.Anbu
36.M.Janaki
37.N.Usharani
38.R K.Merlin Rajini
39.N.Deepa
40.K C.Janani
41.K.Muppidathi @ Selvarani
42.S.Uma Maheswari
43.M.Ganesan
44.K.Gayathri
45.M.Subramani
46.G.Rosita Rexalin
47.V.Kavitha
48.T.Anandhi
49.J.Indumathi
50.A.Rameshkumar
51.G.Vinoth Kumar
52.N.Vijayamala
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
16/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
53.M.Subramani
54.J.R.Srinivasan
55.A.Muthuameena
56.K.Udhayakumar
57.S.Soundararajan
58.P S.Thyagarajan
59.A.Nirmala
60.K.Jayaguru
61.S.Michel
62.T.Ganesan
63.V.Buvaneshwari
64.P.Krishna Poongothai
65.T.Livingta
66.R.Umagowri
67.A.Raju
68.B.Raveendiran
69.P.G.Saranbabu
70.V.Anitha
71.D.Radha
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
17/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
72.S.Deepa
73.P.Kokila
74.S.Malarselvi
75.K.Sekar
76.P.Anbarasu
77.M.Kanagasabapathy
78.M.Sathiyakeerthi
79.A.Kasinathan
80.H.Mohamedumar
81.M.Pragadeeswaran
82.C.Thaiyalnayaki
83.K.Concelia
84.C.Vijayalakshmi
85.S.Amutha Rajeswari
86.N.Venkatalakshmi
87.N.Somasundaram
88.R.Jayabarathi
89.B.Jaya Sutha
90.G.Kalpana
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
18/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
91.V.Kanagaraj
92.T.Murugesan
93.C S.Thirunavukkarasu
94.B.Mariarosalin
95.M.Karthika
96.D.Jeyaraj
97.U.Marsiha begum
98.S.Barani
99.S.Nishanthi
100.M.Boomah Devi
101.P.Senthilkumar
102.K.Arunnehru
103.V.Kalaiselvan
104.C.Maruthuraj
105.S.Sivagami
106.K.Shabina Banu
107.T.Geetha
108.A.Saravanakumar
109.J.Sebastin Anbu Raj
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
19/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
110.S.Silambuselvi
111.D.Chitra
112.S.Sathiya
113.S.Balamurugan
114.C.Thambidurai
115.P.Rajini
116.A.MohamedAppas
117.P.Srividhya
118.G.Umamaheswari
119.M.Kalaiyarasi
120.U.Arulanandham
121.M.Muthukrishnan
122.M.Shanbagavalli
123.S.Uthirapathi
124.N.Purusothaman
125.G.Raja
126.R.Gowri
127.L.Balaji
128.P.Rajkumar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
20/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
129.K.Maheswari
130.K.Sudhamathi
131.P.Kavitha
132.R.Tamilarasi
133.P.Prema
134.R.Manikandan
135.A.Bharathi Lakshmi
136.J.Dhanalakshmi
137.L .Rajalakshmi
138.T.Anbazhagan
139.R.Vetriselvan
140.A.Ezhilarasi
141.P.Ramalakshmi
142.V.Navaneeth
143.K.Gowri
143.R.Mahesh
145.S.Jareen Banu
146.K.Kannan
147.N.Prema
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
21/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
148.S.Sumathi
149.R.Sangeetha
150.A.Gnana Rosy
151.K.Menaka
152.R.Selvakumar
153.G.Lakshmi
154.M.Arulmozhi
155.R.Saranraj
156.S.Suseela
157.R.Govindarasu
158.V.Malarvizhi
159.N.Jayanthi
160.M.Kalpana
161.T.Nithya
162.P.Sumathi
163.A.Pushparaju
164.S.Syed Yusuff
165.K.R.Ganesan
166.R.Selvamani
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
22/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
167.P.Thangamani
168.P.Rajkumar
169.P.Tharani
170.K.Jegatheeswari
171.N.Senthilkumar
172.B.Meenasaranya
173.A.Usha
174.G.Sangareswari
175.N.Veerasamy
176.S.Kamalasridevi
177.R.TamilSelvi
178.B.Esakkimuthu
179.D.M.Rama
180.R.Shrijayanthi
181.K.Kalaivani
182.T.Ganga Parameswari
183.M.Brammasakthi
184.S.Amuthalakshmi
185.L.Raveendra Kumar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
23/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
186.P.Kalaichelvi
187.M.Krishna Moorthy
188.R.Selvaraj
189.S.Jothi
190.S.Rathivinaisha
191.P.Kuppuraj
192.K.Senthil Sevugapandian
Respondent(s)
PRAYER Review Application filed under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section
114 of C.P.C., to review the petition as against the order dated 21.03.2025
passed in W.P.No.9011 of 2022.
For Applicant(s): Mr.P.S.Raman
Advocate General assisted by
Mrs.S.Mythreye Chandru
Special Government Pleader
For Respondent(s): Mrs.N.Kavitha Rameshwar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
24/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
Rev.A.No.172 of 2025
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
Rep. by its Principal Secretary to Government,
School Education Department,
Fort.St.George, Chennai-600 009.
2.The Director of School Education
DPI Campus, College Road,
Chennai-600 006.
Review Applicant(s)
Vs
1. M Thangadurai
2.M Ramya
3.K Maheswari
4.K Umadevi
5.The Teachers Recruitment Board
Rep. by its Chairman
4th Floor, D.P.I. Campus,
College Road, Chennai-600 006.
Respondent(s)
PRAYER Review Application filed under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section
114 of C.P.C., to review the petition as against the common order dated
21.03.2025 passed in W.P.No.32621 of 2024.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
25/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
For Applicant(s): Mr.P.S.Raman
Advocate General assisted by
Mrs.S.Mythreye Chandru
Special Government Pleader
For Respondent(s): Mrs.N.Kavitha Rameshwar
for R1 to R4
Mr.R.Neelagandan
Additional Advocate General
assisted by
Mr.C.Kathiravan
Standing Counsel for R5
COMMON ORDER
The issue involved in all these Review Applications are common and hence, they are taken up together, heard and disposed of through this common order.
2.Review Application Nos.171 and 172 of 2025 have been filed by the State of Tamil Nadu and the Education Department, to review the order passed in W.P.No.9011 of 2022. Review Application No.171 of 2025 pertains to the post of P.G. Assistant and Review Application No.172 of 2025 pertains to the post of B.T. Assistant.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
26/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
3.Review Application No.170 of 2025 pertains to the extension of the benefit conferred by the order passed by this Court in the writ petition to Typists on par with Junior Assistants.
4.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.
5.The learned Advocate General appearing on behalf of the review applicants in Review Application Nos.171 and 172 of 2025 submitted that certain vital facts were not brought to the notice of this Court when the writ petitions were heard. It was submitted that insofar as B.T. Assistants are concerned, they come under Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service. The learned Advocate General pointed out to G.O.Ms.No.175 dated 19.07.2007, which was issued based on a statement made by the Hon'ble Minister on the floor of the House and it was submitted that this Government Order was not passed in https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm ) 27/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025 exercise of power under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. The learned Advocate General also pointed out G.O.Ms.No.7, dated 20.01.2020, which was issued under Article 309 of the Constitution of India and in this Government Order, it was made clear that the amendments will come into force with effect from 19.07.2007. This Government Order provided that 2% out of 50% of vacancies would be earmarked for promotion by recruitment by transfer and it will be filled up from among those staffs who are Superintendents, Assistants and Junior Assistants who are qualified in the Tamil Nadu Ministerial Service and working in School Education Department. Subsequently, G.O.Ms.No.13, dated 30.01.2020, was also issued under Article 309 of the Constitution of India and the Special Rules came into force only from the date of its publication and it was made clear that the recruitment by transfer will be made in the ratio of 50%:48%:2%.
6.By relying upon the above Government Orders, it was submitted that for the period between 2014-2015 up to 2016-2017, 32 vacancies would be https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm ) 28/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025 eligible by calculating 2% out of 50% vacancies. It was further submitted that there was no promotion or recruitment during 2017-2018 up to 2022-2023 and therefore, there is no need to grant any promotion by recruitment by transfer for this period. For the period from 2023-2024, there will be 119 vacancies and these will be filled up in the ratio of 2% out of total 100%. Thus, totally 151 persons will be eligible from the Ministerial Service and whereas, it was wrongly informed to this Court that 517 persons will be eligible under the 2% quota for promotion by recruitment by transfer.
7.Apart from the above, the learned Advocate General also pointed out that year wise seniority cannot be adopted, since there are many seniors who have been awaiting for a very long time for their promotion and if year wise seniority is done, many of the juniors who fall under the 2% quota will be placed above their seniors.
8.The learned Advocate General further submitted that the Typists are not covered under any of the Government Orders and they will not be eligible under https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm ) 29/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025 the 2% quota. G.O.Ms.No.126 dated 21.05.2025, has been issued by the School Education Department under Article 309 of the Constitution of India and hence, persons claiming under the 2% quota will have to satisfy the qualification prescribed.
9.Insofar as Review Application No.171 of 2025 is concerned, the learned Advocate General pointed out to G.O.Ms.No.720, dated 28.04.1981, which provided that the post of P.G. Assistants will be filled up in the proportion of 50:50 for recruitment by transfer and by promotion. Subsequently, G.O.(4D).No.21, dated 02.11.2011, came to be issued and this brought the 2% quota out of 50%. However, this Government Order was not passed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. In spite of the same, for the period from 2011-2012 and 2013-2014, 71 persons were appointed under the 2% quota. There was no promotion for the period from 2014-2015 to 2021-2022. Ultimately, G.O.Ms.No.14, dated 30.01.2020, was issued under Article 309 of the Constitution of India and this provided for the amendment to the education https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm ) 30/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025 service and it provided for 2% quota. This amendment came into effect only from 30.01.2020 and was not given any retrospective effect. Therefore, the 2% quota can be implemented only from 01.01.2021. For the period from 2014- 2015 up to 2021-2022, 164 vacancies arose under the 2% quota and 128 persons were benefited and 36 persons alone were left out. Since the relevant Government Order came into the effect only from 01.01.2021, the 36 persons who were left out cannot be considered unless they claim for parity with the 71 persons who were already been appointed under the 2% quota pursuant to G.O.Ms.No.21, dated 02.11.2011. Starting from the panel drawn from 01.01.2021, their will be no difficulty in implementing the 2% quota. G.O.Ms.No.261, dated 09.12.2024, has been issued and it provides for the qualification to come under the 2% quota.
10.The learned Advocate General further submitted that like in the case of B.T. Assistant, even here, year wise panel for granting promotion will affect many seniors and therefore, bulk appointment will be made under 2% quota based on the seniority.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
31/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
11.The learned Advocate General concluded his arguments by submitting that the effect of allowing these review applications will only result in an alteration of numbers and the crux of the order will remain intact. It was further submitted that clarity is required with respect to the direction given by this Court for year wise panel.
12.Insofar as Review Application No.170 of 2025 is concerned, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the review applicant submitted that the post of Typist has always been considered on par with Junior Assistant. To substantiate the same, the learned Senior Counsel pointed out to G.O.Ms.No.50, dated 14.02.1995. The learned Senior Counsel also brought to the notice of this Court, G.O.Ms.No.175, dated 19.07.2007, which did not speak about the post of Typists, and contended that it has to be read along with the G.O.Ms.No.21, dated 02.11.2011, which made it clear that Junior Assistants also includes Typists. The learned Senior Counsel also pointed out to the proceedings of the Joint Director of School Education, dated 22.11.2010, where it was mentioned that Typist will also be entitled for being appointed as B.T. Assistant.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
32/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
13.The learned counsel for the writ petitioner submitted that the review applicants in the guise of arguing the review applications are attempting to reargue the entire case. It was further contended that all the grounds that were raised in the review applications were considered by this Court while disposing of the writ petition and there is no error apparent on the face of the order. Therefore, it was contended that there are absolutely no merits in the review applications. It was further argued that the review applications have been filed only as against one writ petition and whereas, the order pertained to a batch of writ petitions. Therefore, since no review application has been filed insofar as those writ petitions are concerned, the order passed in these review applications will not have any bearing against the petitioners in those writ petitions.
14.This Court has carefully considered the submissions made on either side and also the materials available on record.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
33/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
15.This Court must first remind itself of the scope of a review application. The Madras High Court Writ Rules, 2021, provides for the scope of the review under Rule 29. It is made clear that no petition for review will be entertained except on the grounds mentioned in order XLVII Rule 1 of C.P.C. It was also made clear that a review application is not maintainable as against an order which has already been passed in the previous review application.
16.It will also be relevant to take note of the judgement of the Apex Court in Yashwant Sinha and Others vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Others reported in MANU/SC/1564/2019. This judgement dealt with the entire length and breadth of the scope of a review petition. It was held that a review application will be maintainable only when there is discovery of new and important matter of evidence which after the exercise of due diligence, was not within the knowledge of the petitioner or could not be produced by him. The other ground on which the review application is maintainable is where there is a https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm ) 34/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025 mistake or error apparent on the face of the record. Insofar as entertaining an application on the ground of sufficient reasons, it was held that the said term will mean a reason sufficient on grounds analogous to those specified in the Rules. It was also made clear that review proceedings cannot be equated with the original hearing of the case and it is by no means an appeal in disguise. Even insofar as an error apparent on the face of the record, it should not be an error which has to be fished out or searched for. It was made abundantly clear that repetition of old and overruled arguments cannot be reopened in a review application.
17.Insofar as all the Government Orders which were relied upon by the learned Advocate General seeking for the review of the order passed in a writ petition, it is seen that all those Government Orders were duly taken into consideration while passing the common judgements in the writ petitions. In fact, all the grounds that have been raised in these review applications were raised in the counter affidavit filed in the writ petitions and only after https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm ) 35/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025 considering the same, the common judgement was passed in the writ petitions. It is quite unfortunate that the respondents who had earlier given instructions to the learned Advocate General based on which the submissions were made by the learned Advocate General and which has also been recorded by this Court while disposing of the writ petitions, now want the learned Advocate General to come up with a different theory on the scope of the very same Government Orders which were considered at the time of disposing the writ petitions. The respondents, in fact, are putting the learned Advocate General in a tight spot, since the submissions were made by the learned Advocate General in the writ petitions only based on the specific instructions received from the respondents. In fact, at Paragraph No.22 of the judgement, this Court appreciated the fair submissions made by the learned Advocate General which sufficiently took care of the grievances expressed by the writ petitioners.
18.In view of the above, this Court cannot once again go into the scope of the very same Government Orders and come up with a different finding and the same will be beyond the scope of review jurisdiction. These review applications https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm ) 36/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025 have been filed to virtually reopen those arguments/stand taken in the counter affidavit, which were considered by this Court when the common judgement was passed. Hence, the attempt made by the review applicants in Review Application Nos.171 and 172 of 2025 is nothing but an appeal in disguise where they are wanting this Court to rehear the matter. In short, the respondents are now giving a different view on the scope of the Government Orders. Just because another view is possible, that does not become a ground for reviewing the judgement passed in the writ petitions.
19.The judgement was passed in a batch of writ petitions and whereas, the review application has been filed by the Government only in relation to one writ petition viz., W.P.No.9011 of 2022. This would mean that the orders that will equally apply to other writ petitions have not been questioned. By filing one review application, the respondents cannot seek for review of the order passed in a batch of writ petitions even though, a common judgement was passed in those writ petitions. This is yet another ground as to why Review Application Nos.171 and 172 of 2025, are liable to be dismissed by this Court.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
37/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
20.Insofar as Review Application No.170 of 2025 is concerned, the fact that Typists was considered on par with Junior Assistants will not help the review applicants, since the relevant Government Order in G.O.Ms.No.7, dated 20.01.2020 and G.O.Ms.No.13, dated 30.01.2020, only deals with Superintendents, Assistants and Junior Assistants and consciously, the post of Typists has been omitted. It must also be kept in mind that those Government Orders were issued under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. Therefore, unless and otherwise, those Government Orders are specifically questioned on the ground that the post of Typists was considered on par with post of Junior Assistants for a long period of time and in spite of the same, the post of Typists has not been included in the 2% quota for B.T. Assistants, the same cannot be decided in a review application. Hence, liberty is granted to the review applicants to question the relevant Government Orders, if so advised, and to proceed further in accordance with law.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
38/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
21.In the result, all the review applications stand dismissed. No Costs.
15-07-2025 Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes Neutral Citation:Yes/No ssr https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm ) 39/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025 To
1.The Principal Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu, School Education Department.
Fort St. George. Chennai -600 009.
2.The Commissioner of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai -600 006.
3.The Joint Director of School Education (Personnel), (Higher Secondary) D.P.I. Campus, College Road, Chennai -600 006.
4.The Chairman, Teachers Recruitment Board, 4th Floor, D.P.I.Campus, College Road, Chennai-600 006.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )
40/40 Rev.A.Nos.170, 171 & 172 of 2025
N.ANAND VENKATESH J.
ssr
Review Application Nos.170, 171 and 172 of 2025
15-07-2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 15/07/2025 02:15:52 pm )