← Library
Madras High CourtWP/34682/2006disposed of

Mrs. Chennakrishna Reddy v. The State Of Tamilnadu

2019-06-11Honourable Mr Justice M.Dhandapani2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 11.06.2019

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI, J.

W.P.No.34682 of 2006 and W.P.M.P.No.1 of 2006 Mr. Chennakrishna Reddy ...Petitioner vs

1. The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by the Secretary to Government, Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9.

2. The Director of Teacher Education Research and Training, College Road, Chennai.

3. The Bharathiya Shiksha Parishad Represented by its Registrar, Mr. Raja Singh, Bharat Bhavan, Matiyari Chinnut Paizabad Road, Lucknow- 227105.

4.Indira Gandhi Teacher Training College, No.514, Mahalakshmipuram, Bangalore 86.

... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ or any other order particularly in the nature of a writ of mandamus directing the second respondent to evaluate the Diploma Teacher Education (D.T.E.) Certificate issued by the 3rd respondent dated 24.07.2002 interms of G.O.MsNo.62 (School Education Department) dated 16.05.2002.

For Petitioner : Mr. J. Nanagopal For Respondents: Mr. A. Rajaperumal, AGP

O R D E R

Petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to evaluate the Diploma Teacher Education (D.T.E) Certificate issued by the 3rd respondent dated 24.07.2002 interms of G.O.Ms.No.62 (School Education Department) dated 16.05.2002.

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

2. According to the petitioner, he has undergone two years diploma in Teacher's Education in the 3rd respondent Institution the Bharathiya Shiksha Parishad. Further, the case of the petitioner is that he has completed the course and has also obtained the Diploma in Teacher's Education Certificate. The petitioner has made application with the prescribed fees to the 2nd respondent for evaluating the Diploma Certificate, but the 2nd respondent informed that the diploma Certificate issued by The Bharthiya Shiksha Parishad could not be evaluated since there is no rules for the evaluation of the Certificates obtained through correspondence Course. Challenging the said order, petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.

3. When the Writ Petition came up for hearing, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that subsequently, it was learnt that the 4th respondent Institution was a bogus institution and therefore, nothing survives for consideration in this Writ Petition.

4. Recording the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Writ Petition is dismissed as infructuous. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CCC) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mrn To 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, represented by the Secretary to Government, Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai-9.

2.The Director of Teacher Education Research and Training, College Road, Chennai.

+1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.47584 W.P.No.34682 of 2006 and W.P.M.P.No.1 of 2006 CNR(CO) RRS(07/08/2019) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/