Madras High Court
The Director Of Matriculation ... vs Bharath Advanced Matriculation ... on 29 June, 2021
W.A.(MD)No.247 to 249 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED:29.06.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.S.SIVAGNANAM
AND
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.ANANTHI
W.A.(MD)No.247 to 249 of 2018
and
C.M.P.(MD)Nos.1467 to 1469 of 2018
1.The Director of Matriculation Schools,
DPI Campus College Road,
Chennai – 600 006.
2.The Inspector of Matriculation Schools,
Tirunelveli Region,
Tirunelveli District. : Appellants (In All Cases)
Vs.
1.Bharath Advanced Matriculation School,
Koyyanvillai,
South Soorankudy Post,
Kanyakumari District – 629 501,
Rep. by its Correspondent,
S.Bhagavath, S/o.Subbaiah
2.The Special Officer,
Rajakkamangalam Village Panchayat,
Kannyakumari District. : Respondents in W.A(MD)No.247 of 2018
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
1/5
W.A.(MD)No.247 to 249 of 2018
(R2 is suo-motu impleaded vide Court order,
dated 17.04.2018 made in W.A(MD)247 to 249 of 2018)
1.St.Johns Matriculation School,
Thoothoor,
Kanyakumari District,
Rep. by its Correspondent,
Rev. Sister Roshni.
2.The Special Officer,
Rajakkamangalam Village Panchayat,
Kannyakumari District. : Respondents in W.A(MD)No.248 of 2018
(R2 is suo-motu impleaded vide Court order,
dated 17.04.2018 made in W.A(MD)247 to 249 of 2018)
Lotus Matriculation School,
Rep. by its Correspondent Mr.S.Murugan,
103 C 11/10 Papanasam Main Road,
Marutham Nagar, Dana,
Vicramasingapuram,
Tirunelveli District – 627 425. : Respondent in W.A(MD)No.249 of 2018
COMMON PRAYER: Writ Appeals filed under Clause 15 of the Letters
Patent, against the orders dated 22.06.2015, 17.06.2015 and 18.06.2015
made in W.P.(MD)Nos.5745, 9769 and 9851 of 2015, respectively, on the
file of this Hon'ble Court and allow this Writ Appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
2/5
W.A.(MD)No.247 to 249 of 2018
For Appellant : Mr.R.Baskaran,
Standing Counsel for Government
For Respondents : Mrs.L.Victoria Gowri
COMMON JUDGMENT
***************************
[Common Judgment of the Court was delivered by
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.]
By consent of both parties, the appeal itself is taken up for final
disposal.
2.Heard Mr.R.Baskaran, learned Standing Counsel for
Government appearing for the appellants and Mrs.L.Victoria Gowri,
learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
3.The respondents / writ petitioners are matriculation schools,
which challenge the proceedings of the first respondent dated
05.01.2015, 10.02.2015 & 09.02.2015, respectively, which proposed to
cancel the recognition, on the ground that the schools have not obtained
building plan approval from the department of Town and Country
Planning.
4.Admittedly, the respondent institutions have classes only up to
8th standard. The learned Writ Court examined the matter and took note
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
3/5
W.A.(MD)No.247 to 249 of 2018
of the relevant Government orders and in particular, G.O.(Ms).No.270,
School Education (X2) Department dated 22.10.2012, which does not
impose any condition that the building plan should be approved by the
Joint Director or Deputy Director of Town and Country Planning, since it
is the executive authority or the local body which is the competent
authority. Admittedly, the respondent institutions have fulfilled such
requirement. Further, the learned Writ Court took note of the earlier
decision in an identical issue, which appears to have attained finality.
Further more, we find that the institutions are still continuing to run in
the said buildings. For the above reasons, we find no grounds to interfere
with the order passed by the learned Writ Court.
5.Accordingly, these Writ Appeals are dismissed. However, there
shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petitions are closed.
[T.S.S., J.] & [S.A.I., J.]
29.06.2021
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
MR
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
4/5
W.A.(MD)No.247 to 249 of 2018
T.S.SIVAGNANAM, J.
AND
S.ANANTHI, J.
MR
COMMON JUDGMENT MADE IN
W.A.(MD)No.247 to 249 of 2018
and
C.M.P.(MD)Nos.1467 to 1469 of 2018
29.06.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
