Mrs.T.J.Manjuladevi M.A. M.Ed. v. The Govt. Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 17.06.2015

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T. MATHIVANAN W.A.No.437 of 2013 & M.P.No.1 of 2013 Mrs.T.J.Manjuladevi Establisher, Administrator and Principal (from Inception i.e., from 1978), Sri Chakravarthy International Matriculation Academy (A Higher Secondary School) (Duly Developed by Mrs.T.J.Manjuladevi, in the Time Expired Lease Land - R.S.No.1356, G.L.R.No.334 Area 3.76 Acres under St. Thomas Mount Cantonment Jurisdiction at No.9, G.S.T Road, St.Thomas Mount Chennai - 600 016 ... Appellant Vs.

1. The Government of India Represented by its Secretary Ministry of Defence, New Delhi - 110 011

2. The Government of Tamil Nadu Rep by its Secretary School Education Department

3. The Director of School Education College Road, Chennai - 600 006 4.The Director of Matriculation Schools College Road, Chennai - 600 006 5.The Inspector of Matriculation Schools Near Rangaswamy Kulam DEO Office Upstairs Chinna Kancheepuram - 631 501 6.Sri Chakravarthy International Matriculation Academy (A Higher Secondary School) No.9, GST Road, St. Thomas Mount Chennai - 600 016

7.Mrs.N.A.Seethalakshmi 8.The Deputy Inspector General of Police Crime Branch, C.I.D., Chennai - 600 002

9. The Government of Tamil Nadu represented by its Secretary Revenue Department 10.The District Collector Kancheepuram - 631 501

11. Dr (Mrs) Y.G.Parthasarathy Dean and Director Padma Seshadri Bala Bhavan Senior Secondary School (Affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi) No.29, Alagirisami Salai K.K.Nagar, Chennai - 600 078 12.Learning Leadership Foundation (A Public Charitable Trust) C/o. Padma Seshadri Bala Bhavan Senior Secondary School (Affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi) Central Administrative Office No.16 and 17, Thirumalaipillai Road T.Nagar, Chennai - 600 017.

13. The Secretary Central Board of Secondary Education No.2, Community Centre Preet Vihar Delhi - 110 092 14.The Government of Tamil Nadu Represented by its Chief Secretary Secretariat Chennai - 600 009

15. The Director Central Bureau of Investigation C.G.O Complex Lodhi Road New Delhi - 110 003 16.Mrs.B.Gajalakshmi 17.Mr.K.Palanichamy ...

Respondents

Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letter Patent to set aside the order dated 19.11.2012 in W.P.No.41241 of 2006. Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of the fourth respondents order made in Na.Ka.No.1509/E6/2004 dated 18.08.2006 and quash the same and direct the fourth respondent to conduct the fresh enquiry in consultation with the second and third respondents also, in accordance with law, based on the documents submitted to the second respondent by the petitioner in her representation dated 28.07.2006, within the stipulated period of time.

For Appellant : Dr.C.Panneerselvam For Respondents : Ms.R.Meenakshi R1 and R3 Mr.R.Ravichandran Addl. Govt. Pleader for R2 to R5, R8 to R10 & R14 Mrs.Selvi George for R6 & R7 Mr.K.Prahalad Bhat for Mrs.Satish Parasaran for R11 & 12

JUDGMENT

(Judgment was delivered by V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN,J) This writ appeal arises out of an order passed by the learned Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant challenging an order of the Director of Matriculation Schools dated 18.08.2006.

2. Heard Dr.C.Panneerselvam, learned counsel for the appellant, Mr.R.Ravichandran, learned Additional Government Pleader for respondents 2 to 5, 8 to 10 and 14, Mrs.Selvi George, learned counsel for respondents 6 and 7 and Mr.K.Prahalad Bhat, learned counsel for respondents 11 and 12.

3. The case of the appellant has a chequered history. It flows as follows:

a) that the appellant established a school and ab initio became the Principal of a school in 1978;

b) that she was placed under suspension by a few persons claiming to be in management of the school on 22.01.1992; c) that after the issue of the show-cause notice dated 06.05.1992, an order of termination dated 23.09.1992 was slapped on her;

d) that the said order of termination was set aside by the Director of Matriculation Schools by an order dated 21.04.1994 on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice;

e) that on the ground that the said order of the Director was not implemented, the appellant came up with a writ petition in W.P.No.19495 of 1994;

f) that the said writ petition was allowed by a learned Judge by an order dated 23.09.1996 directing the respondents therein to implement the order of the Director dated 21.04.1994; g) that thereafter, a fresh enquiry was initiated on 16.11.1996, pursuant to which an order of dismissal was slapped once again on 26.11.1996;

h) that the said second order of dismissal dated 26.11.1996 was challenged by the appellant in W.P.No.17346 of 1997; i) that the said writ petition was allowed by a learned Judge by an order dated 20.04.2000, directing the reinstatement of the appellant into service;

j) that the management filed an appeal against the said order in W.A.No.1087 of 2000;

k) that the said writ appeal W.A.No.1087 of 2000 was taken up by a Division Bench along with another writ petition filed by the appellant herein in W.P.No.13463 of 2005 wherein the appellant had prayed for a writ of prohibition to prevent the original respondents from claiming any affiliation or approval for a new school sought to be established in the same premises; l) that the writ appeal and the writ petition were disposed of by the Division Bench by a common order dated 21.11.2008; m) that by the said order, the Division Bench directed the reinstatement of the appellant with liberty to the management to proceed afresh with the enquiry;

n) that however the prayer made in the writ petition was rejected by the Division Bench;

o) that as against the order of the Division Bench in W.A.No.1087 of 2000 and W.P.No.13463 of 2005, the appellant filed review applications in R.A.Nos.5 and 19 of 2009;

p) that these review applications were dismissed by a Division Bench by an order dated 17.09.2009;

q) that in the meantime, the appellant made a claim that she was the educational agency of the school and that no other person should be recognized as such;

r) that after making such a representation, the appellant also came up with a writ petition in W.P.No.16613 of 2005; s) that this Court disposed of the said writ petition directing the Director of Matriculation Schools to pass orders on her claim to the Educational Agency;

t) that by an order dated 18.08.2006, the Director of Matriculation Schools rejected the claim of the appellant to be the Educational Agency;

u) that the said order of the Director of Matriculation Schools dated 18.08.2006 came to be challenged by the appellant in a writ petition W.P.No.41241 of 2006;

v) that the said writ petition was dismissed by a learned Judge by an order dated 19.11.2012; and w) that it is against the said order the appellant has come up with the above appeal.

4. As seen from the sequence of events narrated above, which

actually span over a period of more than two decades that the original prayer with which the appellant came up before this Court 20 years ago was to set aside the order of dismissal from service. The appellant has succeeded in a long-drawn battle from 1994 upto 2008. In all these proceedings where the appellant had succeeded, the appellant projected only the case of her dismissal from service. But, it was only from 2006 that a claim was made by her to be part of the Educational Agency. Therefore, the Director of Matriculation Schools rightly rejected her claim by the order dated 18.08.2006. This is why the learned Judge rejected the writ petition on the ground that the stand taken by the appellant was contrary to the earlier stand.

5. The appellant ought to have raised an issue at the earliest point of time that what she was seeking is not reinstatement into the position of Principal, but what she was seeking is only a claim for management. The appellant did not seek to do that.

6. Moreover, there is one more thing. It appears that the appellant filed a writ petition in W.P.No.35396 of 2003, seeking a direction to the Director of Matriculation Schools to decide her claim. The writ petition was disposed of with a limited direction. Thereafter a writ appeal came to be filed in W.A.No.1809 of 2004. In the said writ appeal, the very same claim came to be made. But, these facts were also not indicated in the writ petition out of which the present writ appeal arises.

7. As a matter of fact, the learned Judge has taken note of the filing of the said writ petition W.P.No.35396 of 2003 and the order passed in the writ appeal W.A.No.1809 of 2004, in paragraph 7 of the order passed in the writ petition out of which the appeal arises. Therefore, we actually find no justification to interfere with the order of the learned Judge.

Hence, the writ appeal is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar True Copy Sub Assistant Registrar gpa

To

1. The Secretary Government of India Ministry of Defence New Delhi - 110 011 2.The Secretary The Government of Tamil Nadu School Education Department Secretariat Chennai - 600 009

3. The Director of School Education College Road Chennai - 600 006 4.The Director of Matriculation Schools College Road Chennai - 600 006 5.The Inspector of Matriculation Schools Near Rangaswamy Kulam DEO Office Upstairs Chinna Kancheepuram - 631 501 6.The Deputy Inspector General of Police Crime Branch, C.I.D., Chennai - 600 002

7. The Secretary The Government of Tamil Nadu Revenue Department 8.The District Collector Kancheepuram - 631 501

9. Dr (Mrs) Y.G.Parthasarathy Dean and Director Padma Seshadri Bala Bhavan Senior Secondary School (Affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi) No.29, Alagirisami Salai K.K.Nagar, Chennai - 600 078

10. The Secretary Central Board of Secondary Education No.2, Community Centre Preet Vihar, Delhi - 110 092

11.The Chief Secretary The Government of Tamil Nadu

12. The Director Central Bureau of Investigation C.G.O Complex Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110 003.

3 cc to Dr.C.Panneerselvam , Advocate Sr.No.29610 1 cc to Mr.Satish Parasaran , Advocate Sr.No.29789 1 cc to Government Pleader.Sr.No.29769/15 W.A.No.437 of 2013 & M.P.No.1 of 2013 kgk(co) pmk.29.6.2015