Madras High Court
S.Senthilkumar vs The Chairperson on 23 September, 2025
Author: Abdul Quddhose
Bench: Abdul Quddhose
W.P.(MD)No.15588 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 23.09.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ABDUL QUDDHOSE
W.P.(MD)No.15588 of 2021
S.Senthilkumar : Petitioners
Vs.
1.The Chairperson,
National Council for Teacher Education,
Hans Bhawan, Wing II,
New Delhi – 110 002.
2.The Secretary to Government,
School Education Departments,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Fort George, Chennai – 9.
3.The Director,
Directorate of School Education,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai.
1/11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/09/2025 11:31:14 am )
W.P.(MD)No.15588 of 2021
4.The Chairman,
Teacher Recruitment Board,
4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maaligai,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai – 6.
5.The Regional Director,
South Regional Committee (NCTE),
Jnana Bharathi Campus Road,
Nagarbahvi,
Opp. National Law School,
Bangalore – 560 072.
6.The Chief Educational Officer,
Theni,
Theni District.
7.The District Education Officer,
Periyakulam, Theni District, Theni.
8.The Secretary,
Sri Varadha Venkataraman Higher Secondary School,
Venkatachalapuram, Theni District.
9.The Head Master,
Sri Varadha Venkataraman Higher Secondary School,
Venkatachalapuram, Theni District.
10.Kavitha : Respondents
2/11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/09/2025 11:31:14 am )
W.P.(MD)No.15588 of 2021
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, to issue a Writ of Quo-warranto, under what authority the 10th
respondent is holding the present post as the Zoology teacher by 8, 9
respondents schools situated at Sri Varadha Venkataraman Higher
Secondary School, Venkatachalapuram, Theni District as it is illegal
and unconstitutional to continue as Zoology teacher on the grave
criminal misconduct committed by the 10th respondents, which has
well established and exposed by the above facts, further
corroborated on the finding concluded by the National Council for
Teacher Test (NCTE) Notifications dated 28.03.2010, hence remove
from the post he holds.
For Petitioner : Mr.G.Kannan
For Respondents 2,3,6&7 : Mr.S.Shaji Bino,
Special Government Pleader
For Respondent No.4 : Mr.T.Amjad Khan,
Standing Counsel
For Respondents 8 to 10 : Mr.G.Karthik
for M/s.Roy & Roy Associates
3/11
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/09/2025 11:31:14 am )
W.P.(MD)No.15588 of 2021
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for a Writ of Quo-Warranto
questioning the authority of the 10th respondent to hold the post of
Zoology Teacher in the 8th respondent school on the ground that she
has not passed the Teachers Eligibility Test [TET] examination.
2.According to the petitioner, the said appointment is
illegal and unconstitutional since the 10th respondent has committed
a grave misconduct. According to the petitioner, the 10th respondent
has also not made use of the extension granted to her to pass the
TET examination within the stipulated time of 5 years.
3.Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the
official respondents would submit as follows:
a) The Writ Petition is not maintainable, since the 8th
respondent school is not a public authority and the 10th respondent
being a Teacher in the 8th respondent school, a Writ of Quo-Warranto
is not maintainable.
b) The 10th respondent was appointed in the 8th respondent
school prior to the issuance of G.O.(Ms)No.181, School Education
(C2) Department dated 15.11.2011 and therefore, the TET will not
apply to the 10th respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/09/2025 11:31:14 am )
4.Learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents also drew the attention of this Court to the judgment of
the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dr.M.S.Mudhol and
another Vs. Shri S.D.Halegkar and others reported in [1993]
SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 115, in support of his contention that both on the
ground of laches as well as on the ground that the Writ Petition is
not maintainable, since the 8th respondent school is not a public
authority, this Writ Petition has to be dismissed as not maintainable.
5.On the last hearing date, ie., on 15.09.2025, learned
Counsel for the petitioner sought time to produce authorities to
substantiate the petitioner's contentions that a Writ of Quo-Warranto
is maintainable as against the 10th respondent. However, today,
learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that he is unable to
find direct authorities on the said point.
6.In the decision relied upon by the learned Special
Government Pleader appearing for the respondents as referred to
supra, there is an observation made by the Hon'ble Supreme Court
that the post of the Principal in a private school though aided, is not
of such sensitive public importance that the Court should find itself
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/09/2025 11:31:14 am )
impelled to interfere with the appointment by a Writ of Quo-
Warranto even assuming that such a Writ is maintainable. However,
the Hon'ble Supreme Court deemed it fit that it was unnecessary for
it to go into the said question as in the said matter, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court has rejected the request of the petitioner for
issuance of a Writ of Quo-Warranto on the ground of laches, since
the petitioner therein had approached the Court with nine years
delay.
7.In the instant case as well, the 10th respondent is a
Zoology Teacher in a private aided school namely the 8th
respondent. In the instant case as well, there has been an inordinate
delay on the part of the petitioner to approach this Court, though
learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that there has been
only a delay of two years in filing this Writ Petition on the ground
that 9 years extension of time was granted for the 10 th respondent to
complete her TET qualification and within a period of two years
thereafter, the petitioner having filed this Writ Petition, there is no
laches on the part of the petitioner in filing this Writ Petition.
However, it has to be noted that originally five years extension was
only granted for persons who did not possess the TET qualification to
enable them to pass the TET examination. Only thereafter, a further
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/09/2025 11:31:14 am )
extension of 4 years was granted which ended on 31.03.2019. The
petitioner knowing fully well that the 10th respondent was not
possessing the TET qualification ought to have approached this
Court at the earliest point of time. Having waited for almost 11 years
from the date when TET became mandatory on 27.09.2011, this
Court is of the considered view that as held in the decision rendered
by the Hon'ble Supreme Court referred to supra, on the ground of
laches, this Writ Petition has to be dismissed.
8.This Court is not deciding the legal issue as to whether a
Writ of Quo-Warranto is maintainable as against the 10 th respondent,
who is working in a private aided school, namely the 8th respondent.
In the decision relied upon by the learned Special Government
Pleader appearing for the official respondents as well, the Hon'ble
Supreme Court did not go into the said legal issue, but however,
made an observation that the post of Principal in a private school
though aided, is not of such sensitive public importance that the
Court should find itself impelled to interfere with the appointment by
issuing a Writ of Quo-Warranto, even assuming that such a Writ is
maintainable.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/09/2025 11:31:14 am )
9.For the foregoing reasons, on the ground of laches, this
Writ Petition is not maintainable. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is
dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
23.09.2025
Index :Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
NCC : Yes/No
MR
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/09/2025 11:31:14 am )
To
1.The Chairperson,
National Council for Teacher Education,
Hans Bhawan, Wing II,
New Delhi – 110 002.
2.The Secretary to Government,
School Education Departments,
Government of Tamil Nadu,
Fort George, Chennai – 9.
3.The Director,
Directorate of School Education,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai.
4.The Chairman,
Teacher Recruitment Board,
4th Floor, EVK Sampath Maaligai,
DPI Compound, College Road,
Chennai – 6.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/09/2025 11:31:14 am )
5.The Regional Director,
South Regional Committee (NCTE),
Jnana Bharathi Campus Road,
Nagarbahvi,
Opp. National Law School,
Bangalore – 560 072.
6.The Chief Educational Officer,
Theni,
Theni District.
7.The District Education Officer,
Periyakulam,
Theni District, Theni.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/09/2025 11:31:14 am )
ABDUL QUDDHOSE., J.
MR
23.09.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 25/09/2025 11:31:14 am )
