Madras High Court
R.Umavathi vs The Director Of School Education on 17 June, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.1147 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED : 17.06.2021
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T. S. SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.1147 of 2021
and C.M.P.(MD) No.4954 of 2021
R.Umavathi ... Appellant/Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Director of School Education,
D.P.I. Campus, College Road,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai – 600 006.
2.The Chief Educational Officer,
Chief Educational Office,
Thoothukudi District.
3.District Educational Officer,
District Educational Office,
Kovilpatti,
Thoothukudi District.
4.The Secretary,
St. Mary's High School,
Therku Konarkottai,
Chettikurichi Post,
Thoothukudi District.
5.T.Augustine Appasamy,
St. Mary's High School,
Therku Konarkottai,
Chettikurichi Post,
Thoothukudi District. ... Respondents/Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/6
W.A.(MD)No.1147 of 2021
Prayer : Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order
passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.20660 of 2014, dated 09.03.2021.
For Appellant : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy
For Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Mr.A.K.Manickam,
Senior Counsel for Government
For Respondent No.4 : Mr.M.Saravanan
*****
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J.)
Heard Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy, learned counsel for the appellant,
Mr.A.K.Manickam, learned Standing Counsel for Government appearing for
respondent Nos.1 to 3 and Mr.M.Saravanan, learned counsel for the fourth
respondent.
2.Though a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of the fifth
respondent in the Writ Petition, none appeared for him at the time of disposal of
the Writ Petition. Therefore, we are dispensing with notice to the fifth
respondent and also for the reason that we are not issuing any positive direction,
which may impinge his right to continue in the promotional post and we are
dealing only with the correctness of the order passed in W.P.(MD) No.20660 of
2014 dated 09.03.2021. The said Writ Petition was filed by the appellant,
challenging the order passed by the fourth respondent Management dated
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1147 of 2021
09.10.2012 and to restore the appellant to the post of P.T. Assistant in Tamil.
The learned Single Judge had dismissed the Writ Petition on the ground that the
charge memo issued to the appellant is not vitiated on the ground of lack of
jurisdiction.
3.In our considered view, we may left the issue to be decided in the
appeal petition filed before the statutory authority, namely, the Regional Joint
Director of School Education before whom the appeal was filed on 01.04.2014.
In fact, the petition filed for a direction to dispose the appeal in W.P.(MD) No.
4687 of 2015 was disposed of, giving a direction to dispose of the appeal. In our
considered view, the appeal remedy is not only effective but also efficacious and
the appellant has rightly invoked the remedy and it is not proper to
simultaneously challenge the departmental proceedings imposed on the
appellant by filing the Writ Petition.
4.As on date, the fifth respondent is working in the promoted post and
the petitioner is also working in the very same school. Therefore, we are of the
view that the status quo should not be disturbed and it would not be conducive
for the children, especially in the situation of pandemic. Though we are not
inclined to interfere with the order passed in the Writ Petition, we make is clear
that the issue is left open and a decision be taken by the Regional Joint Director
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1147 of 2021
of School Education before whom the appeal petition dated 01.04.2014 is
pending. We also place on record the submission of the fourth respondent that
competent authority has framed the charges and issued charge memo. It is for
the fourth respondent to establish the same before the Regional Joint Director of
School Education when the appeal is heard.
5.In view of the above, the Writ Appeal is disposed of directing the
Regional Joint Director of School Education to dispose of the appeal filed by
the appellant dated 01.04.2014, after issuing notice to the petitioner and
respondent Nos.4 and 5, as expeditiously as possible. In order to facilitate the
appellate authority to dispose of the appeal petition at the earliest, the appellant
is directed to file a copy of the appeal dated 01.04.2014, along with this
judgment before the Regional Joint Director of School Education. The said
authority shall take note of the grounds raised and take a reasoned decision on
merits and in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date
of receipt of a copy of the representation from the appellant in terms of the
above direction. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is
closed.
Index :Yes/No [T.S.S., J.] [S.A.I., J.]
Internet :Yes/No 17.06.2021
sj
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1147 of 2021
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to
COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be
utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy
of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be
the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To
1.The Director of School Education,
D.P.I. Campus, College Road,
Nungambakkam,
Chennai – 600 006.
2.The Chief Educational Officer,
Chief Educational Office,
Thoothukudi District.
3.District Educational Officer,
District Educational Office,
Kovilpatti,
Thoothukudi District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
W.A.(MD)No.1147 of 2021
T. S. SIVAGNANAM, J.
AND
S.ANANTHI, J.
sj
W.A.(MD)No.1147 of 2021
17.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
