Tamil Nadu Corporation School Teachers Association vs The Secretary to Government, Education Department and Others

D. Hariparanthaman, J.—The Original Application in O.A. No. 7928 of 1997 before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal is the present

writ petition.

The challenge in this writ petition is to the order of the first respondent in G.O.Ms. No. 209, School Education Department, dated 08.05.1997

fixing the seniority of Teachers employed in Madurai Corporation. The grievance of the petitioner is that the Teachers employed outside the

Madurai Corporation were brought in and they were also included in the seniority list. Some of those Teachers who were allegedly brought from

outside the Madurai Corporation were shown as respondents 6 to 43 in the Original Application filed by the petitioner in O.A. No. 7928 of 1997

before the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal.

On abolition of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, the matter stood transferred to this Court and the same was renumbered as W.P. No.

19941 of 2007.

Heard the submissions made by all the parties.

The learned Government Advocate submits that the very writ petition itself is not maintainable at the instance of an Association. It is submitted

that in matters relating to seniority, the concerned Teacher should approach the Court and the Association could not maintain a writ petition. The

learned Government Advocate relies on a decision of the Division Bench of this Court in Tamilaga Asiriyar Koottani v. Government of Tamil Nadu

and 19 Ors. reported in 2005 W L.R. 389 in this regard.

However, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid judgment is not applicable to the facts of this case.

I have considered the submissions made by all the parties and I have also perused the aforesaid judgment relied on by the learned Government

Advocate. I am of the considered view that the said judgment squarely applies to the facts of this case as the Association could not maintain a writ

petition as held in paras 11, 12 and 15 of the said judgment and the same are extracted here-under:

In Sand Carrier''s Owner''s Union and others Vs. Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta and others, it was observed by the Calcutta High

Court that

a Public Interest Litigation can be moved, where persons concerned for whose benefit it is moved are socially and educationally backward, and

Public Interest Litigation is also maintainable in cases such as environmental pollution, etc.

However, it was also observed:

The members of such association may be affected by a common order and may have common grievance, but for the purpose of enforcing the

rights of the members, writ petition at the instance of such association is not maintainable.

Accordingly, the Calcutta High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the Owners'' Union.

A similar view has been taken in Government Press Employees'' Association, Bangalore v. Government of Mysore AIR 1962 Mysore 25.

In our opinion, if any educational institution or Head Master or Teacher is aggrieved by the impugned G.O.Ms. No. 13 dated 9.2.2005 they

can file a writ petition in this Court challenging the same, but the appellant - association had no locus standi in the matter. It cannot be said that the

educational institutions or Head Masters are so poor that they are unable to approach this Court. If any particular educational institution or Head

Master has a grievance against the impugned G.O.Ms. No. 13 dated 9.2.2005 it is for such person to file a writ petition or writ appeal, and not for

any association. The writ appeal is dismissed on the ground of lack of locus standi. The writ petition is dismissed for the same reason.

In view of the categorical pronouncement of this Court, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs.