The Correspondent v. The Government Of Tamil Nadu

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 17/06/2026

CORAM

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR and WMP(MD)No.6408 of 2026 The Correspondent, Providence Higher Secondary School, Ritapuram, Kanyakumari District.

... Petitioner Vs.

1. The Government of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Additional Secretary, Department of School Education, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009..

2. The Director of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai - 600 006..

3. The Chief Educational Officer, The Office of the Chief Educational Officer, Kanyakumari District..

4. The District Educational Officer (Secondary), The Office of the District Educational Officer, Nagercoil,Kanyakumari District.

... Respondents 1/7

PRAYER:- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records pertaining to the impugned proceedings the impugned proceedings dated 18.12.2025 in O.Mu.No.630/A4/2025 on the file of the 4th respondent and quash the same directing the respondents to approve the appointment of the incumbent Sr.Vinnarasi Working as sewing teacher in the petitioner school, Providence Higher Secondary school, Ritapuram, Kanyakumari District w.e.f 10.06.2024 with all service benefits.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Savarimuthu For Respondents : Mr.K.K.Udayakumar Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Civil Side)

ORDER

The petitioner herein is an aided school. When there was a vacancy arose in the post of Sewing Teacher consequent upon retirement of an incumbent teacher, Mrs. Maria Mercy was appointed in the said post on 10.06.2024. Accordingly, a proposal was submitted seeking approval of the said post. The said proposal submitted by the petitioner was returned by the third respondent requiring the petitioner to follow the orders issued in G.O(1D) No.80, School Education(E.E. 2(1)) Department dated 2/7

08.07.2025. Aggrieved by the said proceedings dated 18.12.2025 in O.Mu.No.630/A4/2025, the petitioner has approached this Court by filing the present writ petition.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the orders issued in G.O(1D) No.80, School Education(E.E. 2(1)) Department dated 08.07.2025 cannot be made applicable to the appointment in question as the petitioner has already appointed Mrs.Maria Mercy as early as on 10.06.2024 and therefore, the said appointment has to be approved by applying the law that is applicable as on 10.06.2024.

3. The fourth respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit, but there is nothing to justify as to how the orders issued on 08.07.20025 vide G.O(1D) No.80, School Education(E.E. 2(1)) Department can be made applicable to the appointments that were already made prior to the date of issuance of the said proceedings. However, elaborate reasons have been assigned to justify the return of the proposals by referring to the students' strength and sanctioned posts etc. As the impugned proceeding came to be issued only by placing reliance on G.O(1D) No. 3/7

80, School Education(E.E. 2(1)) Department dated 08.07.2025, the reasons cannot be supplemented by way of counter affidavit and the impugned order has to sustain or go only in view of the reasons assigned in the impugned order.

4. In the light of the above, whether the appointment made by the petitioner appointing Mrs.Maria Mercy as Sewing Teacher on 10.06.2024 is in accordance with law or not is a matter to be examined by the third respondent on its own merits. But the same was not done by the third respondent while passing the impugned order. The order came to be passed referring to G.O(1D) No.80, School Education(E.E. 2(1)) Department dated 08.07.2025. Therefore, it is for the third respondent to examine the matter in detail on its own merits without reference to the order issued in G.O(1D) No.80, School Education(E.E. 2(1)) Department dated 08.07.2025.

5. In the Circumstances, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and the same is accordingly quashed and the matter is remanded back to the third respondent. The petitioner is granted liberty to submit the 4/7

proposals to the third respondent and on submission of such proposal, the third respondent shall consider the same on its own merits without reference to the orders issued in G.O(1D) No.80, School Education(E.E. 2(1)) Department dated 08.07.2025 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law as expedtiously as possible at any rate within a period of eight weeks from the date of submission of proposal by the petitioner.

6. In fine, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

17.06.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No CM 5/7

To,

1. The Government of Tamil Nadu, Represented by its Additional Secretary, Department of School Education, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009..

2. The Director of School Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai - 600 006..

3. The Chief Educational Officer, The Office of the Chief Educational Officer, Kanyakumari District..

4. The District Educational Officer (Secondary), The Office of the District Educational Officer, Nagercoil,Kanyakumari District.

6/7

MUMMINENI SUDHEER KUMAR,J CM and WMP(MD)No.6408 of 2026 17/06/2026 7/7