Palaniappan v. The Director Of Elementary Education
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 02.07.2024
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN Palaniappan
...Petitioner
-Vs1. The Director of Elementary Education, Directorate of Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai - 600 096.
2. The District Educational Officer (Elementary), Namakkal District, Namakkal.
3. The Headmaster, Avvai Kalvi Nilayam, 6th Street, CHB Colony, Mahadhavapuram, Tiruchengode, Namakkal - 637211.
4. S.Sumathi
...Respondents
Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent District Educational Officer to take disciplinary action against the fourth respondent based on the petitioner's representation dated 17.05.2024 within a stipulated time as prescribed by this Hon'ble Court. For Petitioner : Mr.C.S.Saravanan For R1 and R2 : Mrs.S.Mythreye Chandru Special Government Pleader
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the second respondent to take disciplinary action against the fourth respondent based on the petitioner's representation dated 17.05.2024 within a stipulated time as prescribed by this Hon'ble Court.
2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the first and second respondents and perused the materials available on record.
3. The petitioner's daughter-in-law was working along with the fourth respondent. There was some dispute between them. Thereafter, the fourth respondent lodged a complaint as against the petitioner's son, as if he had borrowed a sum of Rs.18,00,000/- and failed to return the same. Thereafter, he died and as such, the fourth respondent caused legal notice to the petitioner. Now, the petitioner submitted a representation to take departmental action as against the fourth respondent.
4. The fourth respondent is working in an aided school. That apart, the petitioner has absolutely no locus to submit such a kind of representation that
too seeking departmental action as against the fourth respondent. If at all there is any dispute between the petitioner's son, daughter-in-law and the fourth respondent, he has to approach the appropriate forum for appropriate relief. If at all there is any dereliction of duty or whatever the charges related to the employment, the respondents 1 to 3 are there to take appropriate action as against the fourth respondent.
5. As stated supra, there is a private dispute between the petitioner and the fourth respondent. That apart, now, the fourth respondent was retired from service. Therefore, the representation submitted by the petitioner cannot be considered and the writ petition is devoid of merits and is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. 02.07.2024 Internet: Yes Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order mn G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN. J, mn
To
1. The Director of Elementary Education, Directorate of Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai - 600 096.
2. The District Educational Officer (Elementary), Namakkal District, Namakkal.
3. The Headmaster, Avvai Kalvi Nilayam, 6th Street, CHB Colony, Mahadhavapuram, Tiruchengode, Namakkal - 637211.
02.07.2024