A.K.Isravel Dharmaraj v. The Director Of School Education
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 10.01.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI and W.M.P.(MD)No.574 of 2025 A.K.Isravel Dharmaraj ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Director of School Education, Chennai.
2.The Chief Educational Officer, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District.
3.The District Educational Officer, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District.
4.The President, The Executive Committee, Eka Ratchagar Sabai Higher Secondary School, Salaipudur, Mukuperi - 628616, Aasirvadhapuram Post, Thoothukudi District.
5.Maduram ... Respondents PRAYER : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records pertaining to the records to the impugned order dated 18.12.2024 on the file of the 1/5
respondent no.4 and quash the same as illegal. For Petitioner : Mr.S.Louis For Respondents 1 to 3 : Mr.T.Amjad Khan Government Advocate For Respondents 4 & 5 : Mr.Ragadeeshkumar
ORDER
Challenging the order of removal of the petitioner from the post of Correspondent without notice by the respondents 4 and 5, this Writ Petition is filed.
2.Heard the learned counsels on either side and carefully perused the entire materials available on record.
3.When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 4 and 5 relying upon the paragraph no.8 of the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(MD)No.1345 of 2024, dated 08.08.2024, in which, one of us (LVGJ) was a party, submitted that the question of removal of Secretary do not come under any of the clauses of the Writ Petitions, which could be entertained by this Court against a private minority Management. 4.At this point, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents 1 to 3 submitted that in the interregnum, the said School is brought under the direct payment of the third respondent. 2/5
5.Even in the instant case, the education institution is a minority institution and he was appointed as Correspondent as early as in the year 2022 for the period of three years. However, by the impugned communication dated 18.12.2024, he has been removed from the post of Correspondent by the Committee. This Court is of the considered view that the mandates of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of T.M.A.Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka reported in (2002) 8 SCC 481, cannot be deviated. As far as minority institution are concerned, the factum of appointment and removal of Correspondent by the private educational minority institutions could not be interfered with by this Court under Writ jurisdiction.
6.Hence, the Writ Petition fails and it is accordingly, dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
10.01.2025 NCC : Yes / No Index :
Yes / No Internet :
Yes Mrn 3/5
To 1.The Director of School Education, Chennai.
2.The Chief Educational Officer, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District.
3.The District Educational Officer, Thoothukudi, Thoothukudi District.
4/5
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.
Mrn 10.01.2025 5/5