Madras High Court
P.Gandhimathi vs The Director Of Elementary Education on 18 October, 2024
Author: D.Krishnakumar
Bench: D.Krishnakumar
W.A.No.3062 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 18.10.2024
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.B.BALAJI
W.A.No.3062 of 2024 and
C.M.P.No.23147 of 2024
P.Gandhimathi ... Appellant/Petitioner
-vs-
1. The Director of Elementary Education,
DPI Campus, College Road,
Chennai-600 006.
2. The District Elementary Educational Officer,
Erode District, Erode.
3. The Additional Assistant Elementary Educational Officer,
Kodumudi, Erode District.
4. The Secretary,
Kalaimagal Kalvi Nilayam,
Panapalayam,
Thamaraipalayam Post,
Unjalur (via), Erode Taluk,
Erode District.
5. S.Chandrasekaran ... Respondents/Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent to set aside the orders
passed by the Hon'ble Court made in W.P.No.23401 of 2017 dated 24.11.2022.
1/6
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.3062 of 2024
For Appellant : Mr.G.Sankaran, Senior Counsel
For Mr.J.Jayamalan
For R1 to R3 : Mr.U.M.Ravichandran
Spl. Govt. Pleader
*****
JUDGMENT
(By D.KRISHNAKUMAR,J.,)
This Writ Appeal has been filed, challenging the order dated 24.11.2022
made in W.P.No.23401 of 2017, in and by which, learned Single Judged closed the Writ
Petition for the reason that the Writ Petitioner had already been dismissed from service
and that the said punishment was approved by the Education Department.
2. Mr.U.M.Ravichandran, learned Special Government Pleader takes notice
for R1 to R3. Notice to R4 & R5 is dispensed with, as no adverse order is going to be
passed against them. By consent, the Writ Petition itself is taken up for final disposal at
the admission stage.
3. According to the Writ Petitioner/Appellant herein, the 4th respondent
herein had suspended the appellant on 17.02.2016, falsely alleging certain lapses on her
part and the said suspension order was ordered to be revoked by the 2nd respondent
herein on 29.03.2016. It is the case of the appellant that since the order of reinstatement
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
passed by the 2nd respondent had not been complied with, the 2nd respondent
recommended for direct payment to the School. However, the 3rd respondent, without
adducing any reasons and while upholding the revocation order dated 29.03.2016,
cancelled the order of direct payment. It is further case of the appellant that when the
proceedings of the 3rd respondent dated 20.04.2016, was questioned before the Writ
Court, learned Single Judge has closed the Writ Petition with an observation stated
supra.
4. Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for R1 to R3 produced a
copy of the judgment dated 24.09.2024 passed by this Court in W.A.No.2857 of 2024,
wherein in Clause (iii) of Paragraph No.6, it is stated as follows:
“(iii) In case the second respondent had already approved the
final order passed by the school management, then it is for the appellant to
file an appeal before the appellate authority.”
Thus, he vehemently argued that since the order of punishment had already been
approved by the 2nd respondent herein, there is no question of adjudication further on
the same issue and therefore, there is no infirmity in the order passed by the learned
Single Judge, as it is for the appellant to work out her remedy before the Appellate
Authority, as rightly observed by the Division Bench vide its judgment dated
24.09.2024.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5. Learned Special Government Pleader reiterated across the bar that the
order of punishment had already been approved by the 2nd respondent herein, which is
refuted by the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner. Moreover, there is no material
adduced on the side of the respondents to establish the grant of approval, except
referring to the order of learned Single Judge. In such view of the matter, the appellant
shall submit her objections against the final order passed by the school management to
the second respondent within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this
judgment and upon considering the said objections submitted by the appellant, the
second respondent shall pass appropriate orders thereon within four weeks thereafter, if
necessary, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant. It is needless to
mention here that in case the second respondent had already approved the final order
passed by the school management, then it is for the appellant to file an appeal before the
appellate authority to sort out her grievances.
6. With the above observations and directions, this Writ Appeal is disposed
of. No costs. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
[D.K.K,J.] [P.B.B,J.]
18.10.2024
Index: Yes / No
Internet: Yes / No
Speaking Order/Non Speaking Order
ar
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To:
1. The Director of Elementary Education,
DPI Campus, College Road,
Chennai-600 006.
2. The District Elementary Educational Officer,
Erode District, Erode.
3. The Additional Assistant Elementary Educational Officer,
Kodumudi, Erode District.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
D.KRISHNAKUMAR,J.,
AND
P.B.BALAJI,J.,
ar
18.10.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
