Madras High CourtWP/23812/2019disposed of

Dr.P.Prabhu v. Government Of Tamil Nadu,

2019-11-20Honourable Dr Justice G. Jayachandran4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated : 20.11.2019

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE G.JAYACHANDRAN Writ Petition No.23812 of 2019 Dr.P.Prabhu .. Petitioner /versus/ 1.Government of Tamilnadu, Rep.by its Secretary, Ministry of Education, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.Government of Tamilnadu, Rep.by its Secretary, Department of School Education, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

3.The Director of School Education, D.P.A.Complex, College Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 006.

4.The Chief Education Officer, School Education Department, Panagal Maligai, Saidapet, Chennai - 600 015.

5.CBSE Chennai Regional Office, New No.3, Old No.1630 A, 6th Avenue, J Block, Anna Nagar West, Chennai - 600 040.

6.The District Collector, Office of the District Collectorate, Thiruvallur District.

7.The Commissioner of Police, Office of the Commissioner of Police, Vepery, Chennai - 600 003.

1/6

8.M/s.Ravindra Bharathi Educational Society, Represented by its President Mannuru Subramanyan, No.23/812, Fathekhanpet, Nellore, S.P.S.R.Nellore District, Andhara Pradesh.

9.Ravindra Bharathi Global School, Represented by its Public Relation Officer, Old Door No.2/61, New Door No.16, Karunigar Street, Poonamallee High Road, Nerkundram, Chennai - 600 107.

..Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus, based on the representation dated 27.04.2019 given by the petitioner to the respondents 1 to 6, who are in turn to direct to initiate action against the 9th respondent.

For petitioner : Mr.S.Jaya Pradap Babu For Respondents : Mr.N.Inbanathan, AGP for R1 to R4, R6 & R7 Mr.G.Nagarajan Standing Counsel for R5 Mr.M.Vijayamehanath for R8 & R9

O R D E R

The petitioner is the landlord of the building in which the 8th and 9th respondents schools are established. Petitioner wants the schools to be closed for want of recognition.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents 8 and 9 that due to dispute between them and the petitioner, the Management of the Institute not able to register the lease deed, which has caused difficulty for the institute to approach the CBSE board to get recognition.

3. Counter of the 5th respondent/CBSE indicates that the respondents 8 & 9 are running the school without proper permission or recognition from the Central Board of Secondary Education or the State Government. In such circumstances, this Court is of the view that the respondents 8 and 9 cannot conduct the school without proper recognition.

4. If there is any dispute between the parties, that has to be worked out before the appropriate Court in the manner known to law. As far as the running of the school is concerned, 2/6

recognition from appropriate authority is mandatory. The petitioner after letting out the building for lease now say he does not want the respondents 8 and 9 to run the school in his building without recognition. In such circumstances, let the 1st and 2nd respondents shall take appropriate action to close down the school. Since, this order is passed pursuant to the writ petition filed by the landlord, the landlord shall not be entitled for any rent or lease amount from the respondents 8 and 9 from the date of closure. This closure order is passed to protect the interest of students, who are perusing the course in the unrecognized school run by the respondents 8 and 9.

4. With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

-s/dAssistant Registrar True Copy Sub-Assistant Registrar rpl To 1.The Secretary, Government of Tamilnadu, Ministry of Education, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.

2.The Secretary, Government of Tamilnadu, Department of School Education, Fort St.George, Chennai - 600 009.