Madras High Court
The Director Of School Education vs The Correspondent on 11 December, 2023
Author: S.M.Subramaniam
Bench: S.M.Subramaniam
W.A.(MD).No.685 of 2020
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 11.12.2023
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN
W.A.(MD)No.685 of 2020
and
C.M.P.(MD)No.4125 of 2020
1.The Director of School Education,
College Road, Chennai-600 006.
2.The District Elementary Educational Officer,
Ramanathapuram, Ramanathapuram District.
3.The Additional Assistant Elementary Educational Officer,
Kadaladi-623 703, Ramanathapuram. .. Appellants
Vs.
The Correspondent,
RC Middle School,
Mokkaiyur-623 120, Ramanathapuram District. ... Respondent
PRAYER: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, praying this Court
to set aside the order dated 22.03.2019 made in W.P.(MD).No.2367 of 2018 on the
file of this Court.
Page 1 of 5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.(MD).No.685 of 2020
For Appellants : Mr.D.Sadiq Raja,
Additional Government Pleader
For Respondent : M/s.A.Amala
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.)
This Writ Appeal has been filed against the order dated 22.03.2019
passed in W.P.(MD)No.2367 of 2018.
2.It is not in dispute that the said order was subjected to Rev.Aplc.
(MD)No.32 of 2020. The learned Single Judge passed final orders in the review
application on 26.04.2021, which reads as under:-
“16.In the ultimate analayis, the order dated 22.03.2019
passed in W.P.(MD)No.2367 of 2018 is reviewed in the following
terms:
(i)the orders impugned in the writ petition are set aside and
the matter is remanded back to the concerned respondents for passing
appropriate orders, as observed in paragraph 15 of this order and
also in the light of the orders of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.12525 of
2011, dated 21.03.2012 and W.P.(MD)No.1352 of 2015, dated
11.04.2018 (cited supra).
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
(ii)Such an exercise shall be completed within a period of
twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.”
3.Pursuant to the order passed in the review application, the State
preferred a Writ Appeal, which is yet to be numbered. However, the learned
Additional Government Pleader appearing for the appellants states that condone
delay petition is numbered. Meanwhile, the District Educational Officer,
Paramakudi passed an order in proceedings dated 06.11.2023.
4.The learned Additional Government Pleader raised several grounds
even against the order passed in the review application. However, the learned
Single Judge in the review order was pleased to set aside the impugned order in
the Writ proceedings and remanded the matter back to the concerned respondent
for passing appropriate orders as observed in paragraph No.15 and also in the light
of the orders of this Court dated 21.03.2012 passed in W.P.(MD)No.12525 of 2011
and dated 11.04.2018 passed in W.P.(MD)No.1352 of 2015.
5.In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion that since the
order, which is impugned in the Writ Appeal, dated 22.03.2019, has already been
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
reviewed, this Writ Appeal has become infructuous. As far as the subsequent
proceedings issued by the District Educational Officer, Paramakudi, dated
06.11.2023 is concerned, the authorities competent are at liberty to consider all the
issues afresh de-hors the order dated 06.11.2023 and pass a fresh order on merits
and in accordance with law by considering the factual position prevailed and
prevailing in the respondent School.
6.With the above observations, this Writ Appeal is disposed of as
infructuous. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
(S.M.S.,J.) & (V.L.N.,J.)
11.12.2023
NCC : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Yuva
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.
and
V.LAKSHMINARAYANAN,J.
Yuva
11.12.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
