Thainesan A v. The Commissioner Cum Secretary (Education)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 10.07.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN Thainesan A ... Petitioner Vs.
1. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary (Education) Government of Puducherry, Puducherry.
2. The Director, Directorate of School Education, Government of Puducherry, Puducherry.
3. The Joint Director, Directorate of School Education, Government of Puducherry, Puducherry.
4. The Principal, Petit Seminaire Higher Secondary School, Puducherry.
... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second and third respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.01.2025 1/6
and to conduct inspection of the educational qualification of the faculties/Teachers working in the fourth respondent School and to take appropriate action against those not possessing the requisite qualification for the concerned Teacher posts.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Sai Krishnan For Respondents : Mr.R.Syed Mustafa, Special Government Pleader (Puducherry) (for R1 to R3) Mr.M.Vaikunth (for R4) *****
O R D E R
The instant writ petition has been filed with a prayer for issuing a mandamus to direct the second and third respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 06.01.2025, and to conduct an inspection of the educational qualifications of the faculties/teachers working in the fourth respondent school, and to take appropriate action against those not possessing the requisite qualifications for the concerned teacher posts.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that in the fourth respondent institution, many faculty members lack the required qualifications. In this connection, he sent a representation dated 06.01.2025, to the first respondent, and such representation is pending with them. 2/6
3. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the first to third respondents would fairly submit that they would consider the petitioner's representation within a reasonable time.
4. At this juncture, the learned counsel for the fourth respondent would vehemently contend that the petitioner is a past employee and has given such representation only out of personal animosity. He would further submit that based on the petitioner's complaint, the fourth respondent has already initiated action to verify the educational qualifications of the faculty members. Hence, he prayed to dismiss the instant writ petition.
5. I have given my anxious consideration on either side submissions.
6. The fact remains that the petitioner has raised concerns about the absence of qualified teachers in the fourth respondent institution, which is vehemently disputed by the fourth respondent, but the representation is yet to be considered by the first respondent.
3/6
7. In such view of the matter, without going to the merits of this Writ Petition, this Court deems it appropriate to direct the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 06.01.2025 after issuance of notice to the petitioner and the fourth respondent, and after giving an opportunity of hearing to them, to pass orders on its own merits and in accordance with law, within a period of twelve weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
8. With the above directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.
10.07.2025 kv Index : Yes/No Speaking order /Non Speaking Order To 4/6
1. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary (Education) Government of Puducherry, Puducherry.
2. The Director, Directorate of School Education, Government of Puducherry, Puducherry.
3. The Joint Director, Directorate of School Education, Government of Puducherry, Puducherry.
4. The Principal, Petit Seminaire Higher Secondary School, Puducherry.
5/6
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
kv 10.07.2025 6/6