S. Gandhimathi vs The Chairman, Teachers Recruitment Board

K. Ravichandrabaabu, J.—The prayer in this writ petition is as follows:

The petitioner is seeking for a mandamus to direct the respondent, Teachers Recruitment Board, Chennai to appoint the petitioner as Junior Graduate Assistant permanently from the date on which her batch-mates came to be appointed based on the written examination held on 28.11.2004 with all consequential service and monetary benefits.

The case of the petitioner is that she is B.Sc. (Physics) Graduate and also completed B.Ed. Course. She registered her name in the District Employment Exchange on 15.05.1995 and the registration was renewed on 04.09.2001. Subsequent renewal was due on 30.09.2004. However, the said renewal was not made as the petitioner''s father was taken ill to heart attack and the petitioner was completely put under depression due to the sudden illness of her father. However, she appeared in the written examination to the post of Junior Graduate Assistant for appointment in Government Middle/High/Higher Secondary Schools. She obtained 92 marks. She was also called upon for Certificate Verification on 10.02.2005. However, she was not selected only due to the reason that her employment registration card was renewed on September 2004. Thereafter, she got the renewal on 24.02.2005 by giving ratification for the non renewal period also with continuation of the original seniority from 1998. Therefore, she made a representation on 20.04.2005 and sought for appointment. As the said request was not considered, the present writ petition is filed.

The only grievance of the petitioner is that the respondent has not considered the petitioner to the post of Junior Graduate Assistant due to the non renewal of her employment registration card. Therefore, it is her case that in pursuant to the renewal with retrospective effect, the respondent ought to have considered her for appointment to the said post. In any event, it is stated by the petitioner that she made a representation on 20.04.2005. If any such representation is made, it is for the respondent to consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law. Therefore, without expressing any view on the merits and contentions of the petitioner herein, I only direct the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 20.04.2005 and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law within a period of 8 weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is further made clear that if the said representation has already been disposed of, there is no necessity for passing any fresh order, as stipulated in this writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. The connected miscellaneous petition is closed.