K.Russel Raj v. The Director Of School Education

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 02.12.2025

CORAM

THE HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE M.DHANDAPANI K.Russel Raj

...Petitioner

Vs.

1. The Director of School Education, Directorate of School Education,

2. Chief Educational Officer, Government Presidency Girls Higher Secondary School, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.

3. District Educational Officer, Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Villivakkam, Chennai - 600 049.

4. Secretary/Correspondent, Sri A.B. Pareskh Gujarati Vidya Mandir Higher Secondary School, 19, Ekambareswar Agraham, Chennai - 600 003.

5. The President, Sri A.B. Pareskh Gujarati Vidya Mandir Higher Secondary School, 19, Ekambareswar Agraham, Chennai - 600 003.

1/6

6. The Joint Director (Higher Secondary),

...Respondents

(R6 is suo motu impleaded vide this order) Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the rejection of the Petitioner's candidature for the post of Headmaster dated 19.09.2025 issued by the 4th respondent, quash the same, and consequently direct the Respondents to consider and promote the Petitioner to the post of Headmaster, respecting his seniority and qualifications. For Petitioner :

Mr. P.Sam Japa Singh For Respondents :

Ms.Mythreye Chandru, Special Government Pleader (for R1 to R3 & R6)

O R D E R

The petitioner has filed this Writ Petition to call for the records relating to the rejection of the Petitioner's candidature for the post of Headmaster dated 19.09.2025 issued by the 4th respondent, quash the same, and consequently direct the Respondents to consider and promote the Petitioner to the post of Headmaster, respecting his seniority and qualifications. 2/6

2. The case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as a Drawing Teacher on 21.07.2000 in Sri A.B. Parekh Gujarati Vidya Mandir Higher Second School. Thereafter, he completed M.Phil and Ph.D in Tamil Literature and hence, he was promoted as Post Graduate Assistant (Tamil). He has been continuously serving in the said school for more than 25 years with an unblemished record. When the previous Headmaster retired on 30.04.2025, he had applied for the post of Headmaster on 04.07.2025 in pursuance of circular dated 03.07.2025 issued by the 4th respondent. Since the said application did not evoke any response, he had filed W.P. No. 30853 of 2025 and this Court had directed the respondents to consider his application on merits. In compliance, the 4th respondent had conducted interview in which the petitioner alone had participated.

However, the 4th respondent by order dated 19.09.2025 concluded that the petitioner is not suitable for promotion to the post of Headmaster as he did not possess the required qualification in terms of language proficiency and communication skills. Challenging the said order, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

3. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the official respondents submitted that the Joint Director (Higher Secondary), Directorate of Government Examinations is the competent authority to take a decision on the issue involved in the matter. Therefore, this Court is inclined to 3/6

suo motu implead the Joint Director (Higher Secondary), Directorate of Government Examinations, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai - 600 006, as party respondent No.6.

4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that it would suffice, if this Court permits the petitioner to file fresh representation to the 6th respondent and issue direction to him to consider and pass orders in accordance with law, within a time frame fixed by this Court.

5. The learned Special Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the official respondents has no serious objections to such an order being passed.

6. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record. Since no adverse order is passed against the respondents 4 & 5, notice to the respondents 4 & 5 is dispensed with.

7. Considering the limited request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this Court, without interfering with the impugned order, permits the petitioner to made a fresh representation to the 6th respondent, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If such representation is made, the 6th respondent is directed to consider the same and pass appropriate 4/6

orders on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of such representation, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the 4th and 5th respondents and aggrieved parties, if any.

8. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. 02.12.2025 Index: Yes/No Internet: Yest/No Speaking or Non-speaking order rli To

1. The Director of School Education, Directorate of School Education,

2. Chief Educational Officer, Government Presidency Girls Higher Secondary School, Egmore, Chennai - 600 008.

3. District Educational Officer, Government Girls Higher Secondary School, Villivakkam, Chennai - 600 049.

4. The Joint Director (Higher Secondary), 5/6

M.DHANDAPANI, J.

rli

5. The Joint Director (Higher Secondary), Dated : 02.12.2025 6/6