Ruby Christy.V v. The Director Of School Education
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated: 29.01.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI and WMP(MD)No.8677 of 2021 V.Ruby Christy ... Petitioner Vs 1.The Director of School Education, Office of the Director of School Education, College Road, DPI Campus, Chennai.
2.The District Educational Officer, Office of the District Educational Officer, Sankarankovil, Tenkasi District.
3.The Block Educational Officer, Alangulam, Tenkasi District.
4.Gnana Guru Vidyasalai, Primary School, Venkateswarapuram @ Reddiarpatti, Tenkasi District.
... Respondents 1/6
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 3 to promote the petitioner as a Head Master of 4th respondent school/ Gnana Guru Vidyasalai Primary School at Venkateswarapuram @ Reddiarpatti, Tenkasi District on the basis of his representation dated 22.06.2021 within time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner : Mr.C.Jeganathan For Respondent : Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh, Nos.1 to 3 Additional Govt.Pleader For Respondent : Mr.H.Arumugam No.4
ORDER
The petitioner is working as a Secondary Grade Teacher in the 4th respondent primary school. The petitioner has submitted a representation on 22.06.2021 that she is eligible for promotion as Headmistress in the 4th respondent school and has filed this writ petition seeking a mandamus.
2.The stand of the official respondents is that the representation of this petitioner for the post of Headmistress can be considered only if 2/6
there is any proposal from the Secretary of the 4th respondent the school. However, in this case, the Secretary of the 4th respondent school is involved in a criminal case in crime No.317 of 2020 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Devarkulam Police Station for the offence under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC and he was also absconding. Therefore, according to the learned Additional Government Pleader the 4th respondent school is under direct payment and the appointment of Secretary to the 4th respondent school is yet to be approved. Therefore, in the absence of the Secretary or any proposal from the 4th respondent school, the representation of this petitioner cannot be considered by the official respondents.
3.The learned Counsel for the 4th respondent school submits that the petitioner's son claims 2/3rd share in the administration of the school and has also filed a writ petition before this Court in WP(MD) No.7880 of 2021. In this writ petition, this Court has ordered for direct payment by an order dated 23.04.2021. He further submits that since the petitioner has invited an order of direct payment, the 4th respondent is not in a position to recommend the petitioner for being promoted as a 3/6
Headmistress. He further submits that the criminal case referred by the learned Additional Government Pleader in crime No.317 of 2020 is due to the dispute among the family members and that case has also been closed as mistake of fact.
4.Considering the rival claims, this Court is of the view that there cannot be any mandamus directing this petitioner to be appointed as the Headmistress and therefore, the petitioner has to work out to her remedy in the writ petition filed by her son in WP(MD) No. 7880 of 2021. 5.Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petition is dismissed. 29.01.2025 Internet : Yes / No DSK 4/6
To 1.The Director of School Education, Office of the Director of School Education, College Road, DPI Campus, Chennai.
2.The District Educational Officer, Office of the District Educational Officer, Sankarankovil, Tenkasi District.
3.The Block Educational Officer, Alangulam, Tenkasi District.
5/6
B.PUGALENDHI, J.
dsk 29.01.2025 6/6