W.P.No.45433 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 24.11.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN W.P.No. 45433 of 2025 Tmt.V.Pelsi Christina Thanga Suba, B.T.Assistant (English), Concordia Aided Higher Secondary School, Bargur, Krishnagiri District. : Petitioner Vs. 1.The District of School Education, College Road, Chennai-6. 2.The Chief Educational Officer, Krishnagiri District. 3.The District Educational Officer (Secondary), Krishnagiri District. 4.The Correspondent, Concordia Aided Higher Secondary School, Bargur, Krishnagiri District. : Respondents 1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.45433 of 2025 PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the entire records connected with the impugned order passed by the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.1968/AA4/2025 dated 16.06.2025 and quash the same and consequently, direct the second respondent to approve the appointment of the petitioner as B.T.Assistant (English) in the fourth respondent school, w.e.f. 02.06.2025 with all consequential monetary benefits and pass orders. For Petitioner : Mr.S.N.Ravichandran For Respondents : Mrs.S.Mythreye Chandru Special Government Pleader for R1 to R4 ORDER This writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the third respondent dated 16.06.2025 thereby returned the proposal sent by the fourth respondent seeking approval of the petitioner’s appointment as BT Assistant (English) with effect from 02.06.2025 in the fourth respondent school. 2. The only ground raised by the petitioner is that the third respondent has not the competent authority to consider the proposal sent by the fourth respondent for approval of the appointment of the petitioner herein. 2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.45433 of 2025 3. Learned Special Government Pleader for the respondents submits that the third respondent only returned the proposal sent by the fourth respondent and it cannot be treated as rejection order. However, the third respondent ought to have forwarded the same before the second respondent for approval of the appointment of the petitioner sent by the fourth respondent. 4. In view of the above, impugned order cannot be sustained and liable to be set aside. Accordingly, order dated 16.06.2025 is set aside. The matter is remanded back to the third respondent and the third respondent is directed to forward the proposal sent by the fourth respondent to the second respondent. On receipt of the same, the second respondent is directed to dispose of the same on merits and in accordance with law. 5. With the above directions, the writ petition stands allowed. No costs. WMP Nos.50628 and 50631 of 2025 are closed. 3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.45433 of 2025 24.11.2025 Speaking (or) Non Speaking Order Neutral Citation: Yes/No mrn To 1.The District of School Education, College Road, Chennai-6. 2.The Chief Educational Officer, Krishnagiri District. 3.The District Educational Officer (Secondary), Krishnagiri District. 4.The Correspondent, Concordia Aided Higher Secondary School, Bargur, Krishnagiri District. 4/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.45433 of 2025 G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN , J. (mrn) W.P.No. 45433 of 2025 24.11.2025 5/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis