Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

“11. As rightly argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner, hitherto the concerned managements sent proposal for the conversion of posts and the second respondent used to grant permission to convert the post from one subject to the other needy subject. Learned counsel also submitted that by proceeding Mu.Mu.No.137700/W6/88 dated 8.2.1989, the second respondent at the request of the Management, granted permission to the St.Francis Higher Secondary School, Vavarai, Kanyakumari District, to convert the post of the PG Assistant (Geography) into PG Assistant (Commerce). Similarly, by proceeding Thi.Mu.No. 89903/W6/98 dated 16.3.1999, at the request made by the management of the St.Mary Higher Secondary School, Colachal, the second respondent granted permission to convert the post of PG Assistant (Zoology) into PG Assistant (Commerce). From the above proceedings it is clear that the need of the particular subject teacher in a School will be ascertained by the concerned management and if any https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)Nos.7051/2020, etc. batch conversion of post is required, the concerned management will submit a proposal based on the workload and the second respondent after verifying the same, used to grant permission. But, by the impugned circular, the second respondent has directed the management to fill up the vacant posts by subject roaster without ascertaining the real need of the school with regard to the subject teacher. Hence the impugned circular is unreasonable and based on no material. It may be true, for a new school, when posts are sanctioned, the second respondent is justified in giving a subject roaster to fill up the posts, but cannot insist the Schools, where teachers are already working in different subjects.
12. The Director of School Education on his own has issued circular to fill up the post of Maths, English and Science in the vacancies arising from 1.6.2003. It is also stated in the said circular that for the subject of Scientific Tamil only Science teacher is competent to handle the classes, which is a new subject introduced. It is not in dispute that all the post in a school having standards 6 to 8 are earmarked as Maths, English and Science respectively. It is stated in the impugned circular that the retirement/death/resignation vacancies arising from 1.6.2003 shall be filled up by following the subject roaster. The said circular do not consider the availability of qualified B.A. and B.Ed passed Secondary grade Teacher working in the school for handling English, Maths and Science Subjects. If really there are qualified teachers available to handle English or Maths or Science subjects in the school, it is definitely open to the management to fill up the post by appointing a teacher in the relevant subjects, where there are no qualified or sufficient teachers available. Hence it is clear that the second respondent issued the circular without application of mind and without considering the relevant facts such as availability of teachers in the subjects of English, Maths and Science in a particular school.
13. The impugned order is also in violation of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act and Rules, wherein it is not stipulated anywhere that the https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis WP(MD)Nos.7051/2020, etc. batch particular school should follow the subject roaster. Even G.O.Ms.NO.125 dated 12.11.2003, which is governing the appointment of Middle Grade Graduate Teachers in standards 6 to 8, nowhere states that subject-wise roaster should be followed. In the absence of anything contained in the said Government Order, the second respondent has no jurisdiction to issue the impugned circular and if at all subject roaster is to be followed by the management, it is the government who is competent to issue the subject roaster in accordance with Section 19 of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973.”