In a major judgment, the Madras High Court has declared as unconstitutional a Tamil Nadu State Subordinate Service Rule which restricted recruitment for various posts only by calling for names of eligible candidates from employment exchanges.
A Division Bench comprising Justices N.Paul Vasanthakumar and P.R.Shivakumar directed the authorities to call for applications through advertisement as well as the list from employment exchanges, if it was required to be called for, and do the selection in public for both temporary and permanent posts.
The grievance of S.Vimalraj and four others was that they had passed Higher Secondary examination and underwent first year Diploma Course in Teacher Education in 1992-1993 in an institution in Pudukottai, enjoying temporary recognition. The recognition was set aside by the High Court along with a batch of cases in April 1993. Following this, nearly 28,000 teacher training students who underwent the course in those private teacher training institutes were affected.
The Tamil Nadu Government decided to give training to the affected students through government teacher training institutes in a phased manner. Later, the National Council for Teacher Education Act came into force in July 1995. The law prescribed uniform syllabus for teacher education throughout the country.
The appellants completed the two-year course in 2006-08. As selection for various posts was made based on seniority of registration in employment exchanges for the post of Secondary Grade Teachers, they said their rights had been affected.
They filed a writ petition challenging Rule 10 (A) (a) which restricted appointment of Secondary Grade Teachers only through employment exchanges.
Counsel argued that the rule was unconstitutional. On February 1, 2012, a single Judge dismissed the petition. Hence, the present appeal. The Bench said that considering the judgments of Supreme Court and the Madras High Court, it was of the view that the declaration sought for by the appellants deserved to be allowed.
The rules restricted recruitment for various posts only by calling for names from employment exchanges
A Division Bench comprising Justices N.Paul Vasanthakumar and P.R.Shivakumar directed the authorities to call for applications through advertisement as well as the list from employment exchanges, if it was required to be called for, and do the selection in public for both temporary and permanent posts.
The grievance of S.Vimalraj and four others was that they had passed Higher Secondary examination and underwent first year Diploma Course in Teacher Education in 1992-1993 in an institution in Pudukottai, enjoying temporary recognition. The recognition was set aside by the High Court along with a batch of cases in April 1993. Following this, nearly 28,000 teacher training students who underwent the course in those private teacher training institutes were affected.
The Tamil Nadu Government decided to give training to the affected students through government teacher training institutes in a phased manner. Later, the National Council for Teacher Education Act came into force in July 1995. The law prescribed uniform syllabus for teacher education throughout the country.
The appellants completed the two-year course in 2006-08. As selection for various posts was made based on seniority of registration in employment exchanges for the post of Secondary Grade Teachers, they said their rights had been affected.
They filed a writ petition challenging Rule 10 (A) (a) which restricted appointment of Secondary Grade Teachers only through employment exchanges.
Counsel argued that the rule was unconstitutional. On February 1, 2012, a single Judge dismissed the petition. Hence, the present appeal. The Bench said that considering the judgments of Supreme Court and the Madras High Court, it was of the view that the declaration sought for by the appellants deserved to be allowed.
The rules restricted recruitment for various posts only by calling for names from employment exchanges
No comments:
Post a Comment