Dhanapal v. The Director Of School Education
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 20.11.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH AND W.M.P.Nos.49702 & 49704 of 2025 Dhanapal .. Petitioner Vs.
1.The Director of School Education College Road Chennai 600 006 2.The Chief Educational Officer Krishnagiri District 3.The District Educational Officer 4.The Central Board of Secondary Education Rep. by its Deputy Secretary/Joint Secretary (Affiliation) Shikshakendra No.2, Community Centre Preet Vihar, New Delhi 110 019 5.The Sub Registrar Hosur 6.The Tahsildar 1/6
7.The Green Valley School Rep. by its Correspondent Mr.K.Sundaram Kalahasthipuram Village Avalapalli Post Hosur Taluk Krishnagiri 635 109 8.R.Santhi 9.S.Manjula 10.K.Sathiyavani 11.K.Anabalagan 12.Kalpana 13.R.Raja 14.K.Sundaram 15.S.Elangovan .. Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of certiorari calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings of the 4th respondent dated 30.03.2022 in No.CBSE/1931153/ EX00579-2324/2023-24 and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Kousik For RR1 to 6 : Mr.S.Prabhakaran, Government Advocate
O R D E R
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings of the 2/6
4th respondent dated 30.03.2022 and for a consequential direction to withdraw the sanction granted to the 7th respondent School. 2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 6 and perused the materials placed on record.
3.The sum and substance of the grievance expressed by the petitioner is that the petitioner's mother Nallammal had 1/10th share in the property. However, by fabricating documents, all the other co-owners had managed to lease the property in favour of the 7th respondent School and based on the same, the 1st respondent has also issued NOC dated 15.05.2019. According to the petitioner, all the transactions are illegal and it has been fraudulently created with a view to deprive the petitioner his 1/10th share in the property.
4.In the considered view of this Court, if the petitioner has any grievance, he has to submit a necessary complaint before the authority concerned, who gave NOC and bring to the attention of the authority concerned about the so-called 3/6
fraud played by the other co-owners. Even without taking that step, straightaway the petitioner has approached this Court and challenged the proceedings of the 4th respondent, granting affiliation to the 7th respondent School. 5.In view of the above, it is left open to the petitioner to submit a complaint before the authority concerned and work out his remedy. Except this liberty and clarity, no further orders can be passed in this writ petition. This writ petition is disposed of with the above observation. No costs. Connected W.M.Ps. are closed.
20.11.2025 gya Index : Yes/No 4/6
To 1.The Director of School Education College Road Chennai 600 006 2.The Chief Educational Officer Krishnagiri District 3.The District Educational Officer 4.The Deputy Secretary/Joint Secretary (Affiliation) Central Board of Secondary Education Shikshakendra No.2, Community Centre Preet Vihar, New Delhi 110 019 5.The Sub Registrar Hosur 6.The Tahsildar 5/6
N. ANAND VENKATESH, J.
gya 20.11.2025 6/6