Madras High Court
P. Gandhimathi vs The Director Of Elementary Education on 24 September, 2024
Author: D.Krishnakumar
Bench: D.Krishnakumar
W.A.No.2857 of 2024
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.09.2024
CORAM :
THE HON'BLE MR.D.KRISHNAKUMAR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
W.A.No.2857 of 2024
P. Gandhimathi .. Appellant
Vs
1. The Director of Elementary Education
DPI Campus, College Road,
Chennai - 600 006.
2. The District Elementary Education Officer
Erode District, Erode.
3. The Additional Assistant Elementary Educational Officer
Kodumudi Taluk, Erode District, Erode.
4. The Secretary
Kalaimagal Kalvi Nilayam,
Panapalayam, Thamaraipalayam Post,
Unjalur (Via), Erode Taluk
Erode District.
5. S.Chandrasekaran .. Respondents
Prayer : Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the
order passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.18278 of 2016,
dated 24.11.2022.
__________
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.A.No.2857 of 2024
For the Appellant : Mr.G.Sankaran
Senior Counsel
for M/s.S.Nedunchezhiyan
For the Respondents : Mr.U.M.Ravichandran
Special Government Pleader
for respondents 1 to 3
: Mr.K.Karthikeyan
for 4th respondent
JUDGMENT
(Delivered by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice)
Questioning the legality of the order dated 24.11.2022 passed
by the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.18278 of 2016, the
unsuccessful writ petitioner has filed the present appeal.
2. Cut to the chase, the facts germane are that the appellant
filed the writ petition assailing the charge memo dated 3.5.2016.
Taking note of the fact that the enquiry proceedings were concluded
and the disciplinary authority imposed the penalty of dismissal from
service on the appellant, which was subsequently approved by the
competent authority, the writ petition was closed under the order
impugned in this appeal.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the
appellant submitted that the order passed by the learned Single
Judge is not legally sustainable owing to the fact that the appellant
had in all filed four writ petitions and all these cases were listed on
24.11.2022, but the learned Single Judge without adverting to the
facts and legal issues raised in each of the writ petitions, has merely
recorded that disciplinary authority imposed penalty of dismissal
from service and the same was approved by the competent
authority and closed the instant writ petition.
4. Learned Senior Counsel for the appellant further submitted
that despite the subsistence of an interim order dated 19.5.2016
passed in W.M.P.No.15990 of 2016 in W.P.No.18278 of 2016 [the
instant writ petition], enjoining the respondent authorities from
passing final orders pursuant to the charge memo dated 3.5.2016,
the school management has passed final orders and forwarded it to
the second respondent and the said act of the respondent
authorities cannot be countenanced. He hastened to add that the
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
final order passed by the school management is pending approval
before the second respondent.
5. Refuting the aforesaid submission, learned counsel for the
fourth respondent submitted that inasmuch as the final order is
passed by the school management, the appellant has to challenge
the same, if she is so aggrieved, and the order passed by the writ
court in a challenge to the charge memo warrants no interference.
6. As it is the specific case of learned Senior Counsel for the
appellant that the approval of the second respondent is yet to be
granted to the final order passed by the school management and as
both sides are consenting for passing an order to afford an
opportunity to the appellant to put forth her objections before the
second respondent if approval is not yet granted by the second
respondent, without expressing any opinion on the sustainability of
the order passed by the learned Single Judge, we dispose of the
writ appeal with the following directions:
(i) The appellant shall submit her objections against
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
final order passed by the school management to
the second respondent within two weeks from
the date of receipt of a copy of this order;
(ii)On consideration of the said objections submitted
by the appellant, the second respondent shall
pass appropriate orders betimes, preferably
within four weeks, if necessary, after affording
an opportunity to the appellant; and
(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.
There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently,
C.M.P.No.21001 of 2024 is closed.
(D.K.K., ACJ.) (M.J.R., J.)
24.09.2024
Index : Yes/No
NC : Yes/No
sasi
__________
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 Education Officer
Erode District, Erode.
3. The Additional Assistant Elementary Educational Officer
Kodumudi Taluk, Erode District, Erode.
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
THE HON'BLE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE
AND
M.JOTHIRAMAN,J.
(sasi)
24.09.2024
__________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
