M.K.Soalichamy v. The Director Of Elementary Education
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.06.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIVEK KUMAR SINGH W.P.(MD) No.15554 of 2025 M.K.Solaichamy : Petitioner Vs.
1. The Director of Elementary Education O/o.The Director of Elementary Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 6.
2. The Joint Director Of Elementary Education O/o. The Joint Director Of Elementary Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 6.
3. The Principal Accountant General (A & E) O/o.the Principal Accountant General (A & E), 361, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 018.
4. The Block Educational Officer Tiruchuli Alias M.reddiapatti, Virudhunagar District.
: Respondents P RAYER:
Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to implement the order dated 10.02.2015 passed by the Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Tiruchuli alias M.Reddiapatti and to disburse the monetary benefit and arrears of salary and other 1/6
consequential benefits by revising the pension to the petitioner in the light of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.3381 of 2014 dated 05.02.2014 and Contempt Petition No.2722 of 2014 dated 04.02.2022, based on the representation dated 18.04.2025. For Petitioner : Mr.T.Aswin Raja Simman For Respondents : Mr.M.Siddharthan Additional Government Pleader for R1, R2 and R4 Ms.S,Mahalakshmi for R3
O R D E R
This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to implement the order dated 10.02.2015 passed by the Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Tiruchuli @ M.Reddiapatti and to disburse the monetary benefit and arrears of salary and other consequential benefits by revising the pension to the petitioner in the light of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.3381 of 2014, dated 05.02.2014 and Contempt Petition No.2722 of 2014, dated 04.02.2022, based on his representation dated 18.04.2025.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. By consent of both parties, the Writ Petition is taken up for final disposal at the 2/6
admission stage itself.
3. The petitioner is currently 72 years old. He states that he was initially appointed as a Secondary Grade Teacher on 24.10.1988. Subsequently, he was promoted to the post of Headmaster on 23.03.1990 and retired from service on 31.05.2011.
4. The grievance of the petitioner is that, although this Court had closed the contempt petition in an earlier round of litigation (Cont.P.No.2722 of 2014, dated 10.02.2015) based on the respondent's submission that the benefit of G.O.Ms.No.234 had been extended to him, no monetary benefits have been disbursed. In this regard, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 18.04.2025 to the respondents, requesting that the benefits under G.O.Ms.No.234 be extended to him. As no action has been taken on the said representation, the petitioner has now filed the present writ petition.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that, it would suffice, if this Court issues a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner and pass appropriate orders, 3/6
within a time frame that may be stipulated by this court.
6. It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon him to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other, instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority would amount to dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and direct them to consider the same within a stipulated time.
7. In the light of the above observations and also taking into the consideration the age of the petitioner, there shall be a direction to the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.04.2025, on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, after giving due opportunity to the petitioner, as well as all other persons, who may be interested in the subject matter, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is also made clear that this Court has not expressed any of its views with regard to the 4/6
merits of the matter and that it is open to the respondents to consider the same on its own merits.
8. With the above directions, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 16.06.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No PKN To
1. The Director of Elementary Education O/o.The Director of Elementary Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 6.
2. The Joint Director Of Elementary Education O/o. The Joint Director Of Elementary Education, DPI Campus, College Road, Chennai 6.
3. The Principal Accountant General (A & E) O/o.the Principal Accountant General (A & E), 361, Anna Salai, Chennai 600 018.
4. The Block Educational Officer Tiruchuli Alias M.reddiapatti, Virudhunagar District.
5/6
VIVEK KUMAR SINGH, J.
PKN W.P.(MD) No.15554 of 2025 16.06.2025 6/6