- Bookmark
- Share
- CaseIQ
Tamil Nadu Computer ... v. Higher Secondary Sch...
Factual and Procedural Background
The Supreme Court of India had earlier decided Civil Appeal No. 4187 of 2009 and connected matters on 9-7-2009 (2009) 14 SCC 517. In that judgment it:
- Recognised only those candidates who scored more than 50 % in a special recruitment test as qualified for appointment and regularisation as computer instructors.
- Allowed candidates who scored between 35 % and 49 % to take the next recruitment test without insisting on a B.Ed. degree, as a one-time concession.
- Directed the State of Tamil Nadu to hold a fresh test, follow normal recruitment rules (including reservation), and advertise the vacancies.
Following the disposal of those appeals, several interlocutory applications (IAs) were filed by the parties seeking clarifications, correction of typographical errors in the judgment, and further directions regarding recruitment. The present order resolves those applications.
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the Court should correct numerical errors (“857” and “829”) appearing in specific paragraphs of the 9-7-2009 judgment.
- Whether additional directions or clarifications were required regarding: (a) eligibility of candidates scoring over 50 %, (b) the conduct of a new examination for those scoring 35 %–49 %, and (c) the recruitment process for existing and future vacancies.
- Whether the services of candidates who failed the earlier test should be terminated forthwith and the resulting vacancies filled through a fresh recruitment process.
Arguments of the Parties
Higher Secondary School Computer Teachers Association (First Respondent)
- Requested correction of figures in the original judgment: “857” to read as “894” and “829” to read as “792”.
- Sought clarification that all candidates who obtained more than 50 % marks should be entitled to regularisation.
State of Tamil Nadu
- Asked permission to hold an examination for candidates who scored 35 %–49 %, and to declare those scoring more than 50 % as eligible for appointment.
- Requested authority to recruit vocational computer instructors for 175 existing and future vacancies through the employment exchange based on seniority and existing Government Orders (G.O. Ms. No. 290 dated 6-12-2007 and G.O. Ms. No. 66 dated 2-3-2009).
- Sought correction of the same numerical errors (“857” → “894”; “829” → “792”).
- Moved to place three policy documents on record and sought exemption from filing official translations.
Tamil Nadu Computer Science B.Ed. Graduate Teachers Welfare Society (Appellant)
- Prayed for immediate termination of the 792 candidates who failed the special recruitment drive but continue in service.
- Requested issuance of an advertisement within fifteen days for filling vacancies arising from such terminations, followed by an examination within fifteen days.
- Sought adherence to employment-exchange seniority and reservation rules in filling those vacancies from candidates who secure at least 50 % in the forthcoming exam.
Table of Precedents Cited
No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The Court reviewed:
- The original judgment dated 9-7-2009.
- The array of interlocutory applications and the specific reliefs sought.
- Oral submissions of counsel, including those of the learned Solicitor General representing the State.
It concluded that a substantive review of the earlier decision was unwarranted. Nonetheless, to dispel doubts and rectify typographical mistakes, the Court issued limited clarifications:
- Permitted the State Government to:
- Conduct an examination for candidates who scored between 35 % and 49 % in the earlier test and declare those with more than 50 % as eligible for appointment.
- Recruit vocational computer instructors for 175 existing and future vacancies through the employment exchange, following seniority and applicable Government Orders and policies.
- Corrected numerical errors in paragraphs 20-21, 23-26, and 29-30 of the earlier judgment: the figures “857” are to read “894” and “829” are to read “792”.
Apart from these clarifications, the 9-7-2009 judgment “remains undisturbed in all other respects.”
Holding and Implications
All interlocutory applications were disposed of with limited clarifications and typographical corrections; the substantive judgment of 9-7-2009 stands unchanged.
Implications:
- The State of Tamil Nadu now has clear authority to proceed with a supplementary examination for candidates who earlier scored 35 %–49 % and to recruit for 175 existing and future vacancies via the employment exchange under existing policy.
- Numerical errors in the reported judgment are officially corrected, ensuring administrative accuracy.
- No broader legal precedent is set; the order is confined to executing and clarifying the prior decision in this specific recruitment dispute.
P. Sathasivam, J.— By a common judgment dated 9-7-2009 (2009) 14 SCC 517 this Court in Civil Appeal No. 4187 of 2009, etc. allowed the appeals filed by the appellant herein with the following observations/directions:
“(a) Only those candidates who had secured more than 50% qualifying marks in the special recruitment test shall be treated as qualified and recruited as computer instructors and they shall be so absorbed and their service shall be so regularised in accordance with law;
(b) The remaining candidates who had secured less than 50% qualifying marks but above 35% marks should be declared and held to be unsuccessful and failed in the said special recruitment drive but they would be allowed to appear in the next recruitment test to be held for filling up the remaining vacant posts of computer instructors without insisting upon them to have BEd degree as one-time exception and concession;
(c) The State Government shall also hold the said test by inviting applications through issuing an advertisement and also allow candidates to take the test sponsored by the employment exchange. In the said test all other rules of appointment for such post and the rules of reservation would also apply. The only exception would be the candidates who had received more than 35% marks in the earlier special recruitment drive but less than 50% marks which was qualifying marks may not have BEd degree, which would be treated as one-time exception for them as they were working as computer instructors.”
After disposal of the appeals on the above terms, both parties to the proceedings have now filed the present applications for clarification/directions.
2. Higher Secondary School Computer Teachers Association, the first respondent in Civil Appeal No. 4187 of 2009 has filed IAs Nos. 2 and 3 of 2009. In IA No. 2, they prayed for correction of the figures appearing in paras 20-21, 23-26 and 29-30 of the judgment dated 9-7-2009 (2009) 14 SCC 517 passed by this Court in Civil Appeal No. 4187 of 2009 as “857 to read as 894 and 829 to read as 792”. In IA No. 3 of 2009, the very same applicant has prayed for clarification to the effect that in the proposed test to be held by the State Government in terms of the common judgment, all candidates who secured more than 50% marks would be entitled to be regularised in service.
3. The Government of Tamil Nadu has also filed IAs Nos. 4 to 6 of 2009 in Civil Appeal No. 4187 of 2009. In IA No. 4 of 2009, the State Government has sought the following clarification:
(a) Clarify and permit the State Government to conduct examination for the candidates who have secured 35% to 49% marks in the examination and declare the results of the candidates who secured more than 50% marks as eligible candidates for appointment;
(b) Clarify and permit the State Government to recruit vocational computer instructors for the existing 175 vacancies and future vacancies for the post of computer instructors through the employment exchange based on the seniority with the employment exchange as per the policy decision and also as per GOMs No. 290, School Education Department, dated 6-12-2007 and GOMs No. 66, School Education Department, dated 2-3-2009; and
(c) Direct the correction of the figures appearing in paras 20-21, 23-26 and 29-30 of the judgment dated 9-7-2009 (2009) 14 SCC 517 passed by this Hon'ble Court in CA No. 4187 of 2009 as “857 to read as 894 and 829 to read as 792”.
In IA No. 5 of 2009, the State Government has prayed for taking on record three documents, namely, (i) Policy Note 2007-2008 issued by the State Government, (ii) GOMs No. 290 dated 6-12-2007, and (iii) GOMs No. 66 dated 2-3-2009. In IA No. 6 of 2009, they prayed for exemption from filing official translation of those documents.
4. Tamil Nadu Computer Science BEd Graduate Teachers Welfare Society, the appellant in Civil Appeal No. 4187 of 2009 also filed IA No. 7 of 2009 praying for the following directions:
(a) direct that the services of the 792 candidates who have failed in the special recruitment drive exam but are continuing to work as computer instructors in various government schools should be terminated forthwith;
(b) direct that the advertisement calling for applications from eligible candidates with BEd degree for filling up vacancies arising consequent upon the termination of the services of 792 computer instructors, should be issued within fifteen days, and the exam should be conducted within fifteen days thereafter; and
(c) direct that the vacancies should be filled up following employment exchange seniority and rules of reservation from among the passed candidates who secure pass marks of 50% in the special exam to be conducted by the Teacher Recruitment Board, State of Tamil Nadu.
The appellants also filed IAs Nos. 3-8 of 2009 in Civil Appeals Nos. 4188-89 of 2009 praying for the same clarification.
5. Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respective parties.
6. On going through the judgment dated 9-7-2009 (2009) 14 SCC 517, various applications for clarification/direction sought for by the parties concerned and after hearing their respective arguments, we are not inclined to alter or review the earlier decision. However, in the light of the doubts raised and in view of certain clarifications sought for by the parties including the State of Tamil Nadu represented by Mr Gopal Subramanium, learned Solicitor General of India, and typographical errors crept in certain paragraphs, we clarify the judgment in the following terms:
(a) Permit the State Government to—
(i) conduct examination for the candidates who have secured 35% to 49% marks in the examination and declare the results of the candidates who secured more than 50% marks as eligible candidates for appointment.
(ii) recruit vocational computer instructors for the existing 175 vacancies and future vacancies for the post of computer instructors through the employment exchange based on the seniority with the employment exchange as per the policy decision of the State Government as well as government orders applicable to appointment for the post of computer instructors.
(b) The figures appearing in paras 20-21, 23-26 and 29-30 of the judgment dated 9-7-2009 (2009) 14 SCC 517 in Civil Appeal No. 4187 of 2009, etc. may be read as 894 instead of 857 and 792 instead of 829.
Except the above clarification, the judgment dated 9-7-2009 (2009) 14 SCC 517 remains undisturbed in all other respects.
7. All the applications are disposed of accordingly.
Alert