Aruna Jagadeesan, J.
This writ appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.46530/2006, dated 05.02.2008, whereby, the impugned order of the District Educational Officer, the fourth appellant herein, refusing approval of the appointment of the first respondent as B.T. Assistant (Junior Grade) was set aside and the fourth Appellant was directed to pay arrears of salary and other benefits from 05.08.2003, the date of her appointment.
2.The first respondent has passed M.A. M.Ed. degree in English and was appointed as B.T. Assistant (Junior Grade) in English in the Government Aided Minority School, the second respondent herein in the vacancy that had arisen on account of the transfer of one Jenoviya to another school of the same management. The second respondent submitted proposal to the District Educational Officer, Villupuram, for approval of the appointment of the first respondent, enclosing all the educational certificates, together with mark-lists. The fourth Appellant had sent communication to the school management on 23.07.2004 stating that the details regarding the first respondent's pass in higher secondary were not sufficient and further directed it to produce the particulars of admission given in the college where she was admitted in B.A. Degree. Again on 17.08.2004, the fourth Appellant had returned the proposal of the school management.
3.Though the first respondent took efforts to get details of her admission from Stella Maris College, where-from she passed the degree, she could not get the same, as those records were not preserved beyond ten years. The first respondent had passed B.A. Degree by undertaking the course from June, 1987 to April, 1990 through Stella Maris College and got B.Ed. Degree in Annamalai University through correspondence course and passed the same in 1993 with optional subjects as English and Special English. She also got M.A. Degree from Annamalai University through correspondence course having passed the same in December, 1995 and joined M.Ed. during 1996-97 and passed the examination in May, 1997.
4.Approval was refused on the ground that the first respondent has not passed higher secondary (+2) examination, which is the basic qualification for getting admission for Bachelor's Degree. The first respondent challenged the order of said refusal on the ground that Tamil Nadu Recognized Private Schools (Regulation) Rules, 1974 prescribed qualification for appointment as B.T. Assistant (Junior Grade) with B.A./B.Sc. with B.Ed./B.T. Degrees and nowhere it prescribed that there should be a pass in Higher Secondary. Further, it was submitted that she was given to understand that one should secure an aggregate of 70 marks out of 200 by adding both English with optional Advanced English paper and she secured admission in the regular college (Stella Maris) without any dissent.
5.The learned Single Judge held that the required qualification as prescribed in Annexure V-A of the Tamil Nadu Recognized Private Schools (Regulation) Rules, 1974 and Rule 15(6-A) is only B.A./B.Sc. or its equivalent and B.T. or B.Ed. from any University in the State and therefore, a pass in +2 is not the required qualification as prescribed by the said rules and set aside the impugned Order of the District Education Officer. The learned Judge referred to his decision reported in 2006 (2) MLJ 408 (B.S.Geethabai v. State of Tamil Nadu) which arose on similar facts and held that even if a candidate does not possess +2 qualification and passed B.A. and B.Ed. Degrees through Open University Stream, selection of appointment cannot be denied on the ground that the petitioner studied B.A. (English) and B.Ed. through Open University stream of Madras University and Annamalai University respectively.
6.The learned counsel for the Appellant contended that even if the first respondent had higher Degrees, she having not secured 70% in one subject, which is the minimum marks in the Higher Secondary Examination, cannot be declared to have passed in higher Secondary Examination. Therefore, as the basic qualification is lacking in her case, no approval can be granted regarding her appointment.
7.There is no dispute that to secure an admission in B.A. Degree course, a pass in Higher Secondary is must. In the present case, the first respondent while securing admission in Stella Maris College, had admittedly submitted her mark sheet along with the application for admission. The said college had admitted her and she had pursued her studies for three years and the Madras University had also granted B.A. Degree. It is only at the stage of getting approval of her appointment as B.T. Assistant in a private school, the District Educational Officer had raised objection with her so called ineligibility to be admitted in the Degree Course. She cannot be accused of any fraud or misrepresentation. It was the fault on the part of the college authorities i.e. Stella Maris College in giving admission to the first respondent for the degree course although she did not have the requisite qualifying marks as a result of which, the first respondent pursued her studies in B.A. Degree for three years and now it would not be proper to refuse approval at this stage, particularly when she was not at fault while she got admission in the said college. There is nothing on record to show that she projected her higher secondary examination marks other than what she possessed. In spite of placing her statement of marks before the college authorities, for some reason or the other, it had thought it fit to admit her and the first respondent has chosen to continue in the said degree and now it would be inadvisable to make her suffer for the same. It is to be noted that the college authorities would not have missed to see the qualifying marks when she was admitted and may be, as averred by the first respondent, aggregate of English and Advanced English (optional) would have been taken into consideration, which aspect cannot be ignored. In such a situation, even assuming that the first respondent had no requisite basic qualifying marks in higher secondary, her appointment cannot be disapproved, as it was the bounden duty of the college authorities to have scrutinized higher secondary certificate before admitting her to degree course.
8.In Guru Nanak Dev University v. Sanjay Kumar Katwal and another, 2009 (1) SCC 610, the Honourable Supreme Court has held, referring to its earlier pronouncements in Shri Krishnan v. Kurukshetra University, 1976 (1) SCC 311 and Sanatan Gauda v. Berhampur University, 1990 (3) SCC 23 that when the petitioner was permitted to continue the course and has completed the course in 2007, after four years, to hold that he is not entitled to admission will be irretrievable loss and further it would be unfair and unjust to deny the petitioner the benefit of admission, which was initially accepted and recognized by the Appellant University.
9.The above principle squarely applies to the facts and circumstances of the present case. The college authorities having accepted higher secondary certificate of the first Respondent, and given her admission in B.A. Degree course, whereby she had completed her basic Degree Course and further got Post Graduate Degree in M.A M.Ed. Therefore, it would be unjust and unreasonable now to reject approval of her appointment on the ground that she has not passed +2 examination. In such view of the matter, we see no reason to interfere with the judgment of the learned Single Judge and the same is confirmed.
10.In the result, the writ appeal fails and the same is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, M.P.No.1/1008 is also dismissed.
11.We make it clear that owing to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, it merited aforesaid consideration and this will not be a precedent in any other case similarly situated.
tar To
1.The Correspondent, St.Ann's High School, Thensiruvallur Post, Pukkiravari (via) Kalllakurichi, Villupuram 606 204