AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
T. Raja, J.—The present writ appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the prayer of the Appellant to direct the Respondents to re-designate Craft Teachers working in the Government Schools of Tamil Nadu as Secondary Grade Teachers.
The members of the Petitioner''s association were originally appointed as part-time Craft Teachers. Subsequently, the system of imparting Craft instructors in the schools having been slowly given up in the year 1990, the Craft syllabus introduced in the schools were also subsequently ceased to be followed and as a result, the policy decision was taken through G.O. Ms. No. 224, dated 24.03.94 issued by the Educational Department, to give three months training course to the part-time Craft Teachers in the District Institute of Education and Training (DIE Ts) and after giving such three months training course, it was decided to absorb them in the Secondary Grade post with a time scale of pay, only against the existing vacancies.
In the meanwhile, the Government also issued another G.O. Ms. No. 243, dated 28.05.97 clarifying the earlier G.O. Ms. No. 752, dated 18.10.96, that if there are any qualified Craft Instructors, on the vacancy of transfer to other services, these teachers can be given the post of Secondary Grade Teachers and necessary amendment to the Tamil Nadu Education Subordinate Service Rules should be made therefor. But, unfortunately, no such amendment has taken place to give effect to G.O. Ms. No. 243, dated 28.05.97. Here lies the controversy between the members of the Petitioner''s association and the Respondents.
The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, while attacking the learned Single Judge order, has pleaded that when the Government introduced G.O. Ms. No. 752, dated 18.10.96, the said GO has given some benefits to the part-time Craft Teachers to be appointed in the Panchayat Union and Aided Middle Schools as full time Craft Teachers. While doing so, class 3(3) of G.O. Ms. No. 752, takes away the one time life legitimate expectation of the members of the Petitioner''s association to become a Secondary Grade Teacher. As per Class 3(3) of the G.O. Ms. No. 752, the post held by the members of the Petitioner''s association cannot be considered as equivalent to that of the Secondary Grade Teachers and as a result, they cannot be promoted to any higher posts.
Further, it was submitted that when the Craft Teachers are possessing the qualification meant for Secondary Grade Teachers, there cannot be any impediment for re-designating them as Secondary Grade Teachers. Again, it was argued that if the Craft Teachers are re-designated as Secondary Grader Teachers, the Government also would not suffer any financial implication, because the scale of pay of the Craft Teachers and that of the Secondary grade Teachers are one and the same. Since this vital aspect has not been considered by the learned Single Judge, the learned Counsel for the Appellant sought for setting aside the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge.
On the other hand, learned Counsel appearing for the Respondents submits that when the Government passed G.O. Ms. No. 752, dated 18.10.96 directing part-time Craft Teachers to be absorbed as a full time Craft Teachers, the members of the Petitioner''s association welcomed the said GO and after enjoying the benefit given by the said GO from part-time Craft Teachers to full-time Craft Teachers, they cannot challenge one part of the GO, namely, class 3(3), that too, after 11 years from the date of issuance of the GO. Therefore, it was argued that the writ appeal filed by the Petitioner was hopelessly barred by time and further, the writ appeal cannot be maintained by the members of the Petitioner''s association without making the aggrieved teachers as a party, while complaining violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and on that basis, prayed for dismissing the present writ appeal.
Heard the learned Counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
As rightly pointed by the learned Counsel for Respondents, the members of the Petitioner''s association have got the benefit of up gradation from part-time Craft Teachers to full-time Craft Teachers through G.O. Ms. No. 752, dated 18.10.96. After enjoying the benefit for about 11 years, class 3(3) of the said GO cannot be questioned, for the simple reason that even after the issuance of the said GO, the Government again issued another G.O. Ms. No. 243, dated 28.05.97, stating that if there are any qualified Craft Instructors, on the vacancy of transfer to other services, these teachers can be given the post of Secondary Grade Teachers, but that benefit was subject to carrying out necessary amendment to the Tamil Nadu Education Subordinate Service Rules. Admittedly, till date, no amendments as mentioned in the G.O. Ms. No. 243, dated 28.05.97, have been introduced. Therefore, when the Government failed to bring in necessary amendment, the members of the Petitioner''s association cannot be re-designated as Secondary Grade Teachers. In such circumstances, it would be proper to the members of the Petitioner''s association to work out their remedy to bring in necessary amendment for proper implementation of the G.O. Ms. No. 243, dated 28.05.97. Therefore, on the second count also, this Court does not find any infirmity in the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
Thirdly, the members of the Petitioner''s association, after enjoying the benefit of part-time Craft Teachers, which in turn converted to full-time Craft Teachers, by undergoing three months training course, they have been allowed to teach on par with Secondary Grade Teachers. Now, even if the Court quashes the class 3(3) of the G.O. Ms. No. 752, yet the members of the Petitioner''s association would not be in a position to get any benefit as they ask for, unless and until suitable necessary amendments are issued to the Tamil Nadu Education Subordinate Service Rules. Therefore, the reasoning given by the learned Single Judge to dismiss the writ petition that the challenge made to para 3(3) of the G.O. Ms. No. 752, Education, Science and Technology Department, dated 18.10.96 is misconceived, in our considered opinion, does not call for any interference by this Court.
Further, the reliance made by the learned Single Judge on the decision of the Hon''ble Apex Court in the case of S. Devasahayam and Another Vs. Joint Director and Another, , is squarely rejecting the case of the Petitioner. In the said judgment, the claim was made by the Appellant therein stating that he possessed Master''s degree in History, but he had not undergone the regular course. However, a condensed course conducted by the Department itself for a period of 10 months is conferred degree by way of certificate and such teachers are held to be not in the feeder category so as to become eligible to be appointed as Headmaster, for the reason that the arrangement for giving certificate to certain teachers became necessary as there was dearth of postgraduate teachers being available in the higher secondary schools. Therefore, he becomes an inducted teacher by undergoing 10 months condensed course and not a regular teacher in the cadre. Bearing these aspects, if we analyse the case of the Appellant herein, the members of the Petitioner''s association joined their services as part-time Craft Teachers and subsequently, they were upgraded as full-time Craft Teachers with a direction to discharge the functions of the Secondary Grade Teachers, which will not make them equivalent to that of Secondary Grade Teachers, until the necessary amendment to the Tamil Nadu Education Subordinate Service Rules are made.
Admittedly, as of today, the system of imparting Craft Instructors in the schools were given up, therefore, the Government also has not taken steps to carry out any amendment in the Tamil Nadu Education Subordinate Service Rules. Unless the members of the Petitioner''s association take any appropriate steps to bring in amendment, by merely quashing the G.O. Ms. No. 752, they cannot be re-designated, who are Craft Teachers, as Secondary Grade Teachers.
Therefore, this Court, for the reasons mentioned above, does not find any reason in the writ appeal to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge and accordingly, finding no merit in the writ appeal, dismisses the same. No Costs.