Anthonyraj .S v. The District Educational Officer
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 03.08.2022
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.S.SUNDAR and THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY W.A(MD)No.799 of 2022 and C.M.P(MD)No.6796 of 2022 S.Anthonyraj ... Appellant/Petitioner Vs.
1.The District Educational Officer, Office of the District Educational Officer, Sivakasi - 626 123, Virudhunagar District.
2.The President, Thiruthangal Hindu Nadar Uravinmurai, 109, Main Road, Thiruthangal - 626 130, Virudhunagar District. .... Respondents/Respondents. Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent, to set aside the order dated 29.06.2022 passed in W.P(MD)No.12236 of 2022. For Appellant :Mr.M.Solaisamy For R-1 :Mr.S.Saji Bino, Special Government Pleader
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.S.SUNDAR, J.) This writ appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant in W.P(MD)No.12236 of 2022, dated 29.06.2022.
2. Heard Mr.M.Solaisamy, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr.S.Saji Bino, learned Special Government Pleader for the first respondent.
3. The appellant states that he is the member of the second respondent Uravinmurai which appears to be a registered Society. The appellant filed the writ petition for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the writ petitioner's representation, dated 01.04.2022, before passing any order to appoint the Correspondent for the second respondent schools.
4. The grievance of the writ petitioner in the representation is that one Manickam, who has been appointed as Correspondent of the schools managed
by the second respondent is not a person suitable for being appointed as Correspondent. In the representation, he has also stated that a criminal complaint has been registered against the said Manickam for the offence under Section 306 of I.P.C and that, appointment of a person who involved in the criminal case, is contrary to the Scheme of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools Regulation Act and Rules.
5. The learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition on the short ground that only if a person is convicted for an offence, disqualification set out in the Rules, can be applied and that, the appellant cannot requests the official respondents not to appoint the said Manickam as Correspondent as he is not a person convicted for any offence. This Court is is in full agreement with the order of Writ Court.
6. This Court is unable to find any merit in the above writ appeal. Hence, this writ petition is dismissed. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[S.S.S.R., J.] [S.S.Y., J.] 03.08.2022 Index : Yes / No pm
S.S.SUNDAR, J.
and S.SRIMATHY , J.
pm To:
The District Educational Officer, Office of the District Educational Officer, Sivakasi - 626 123, Virudhunagar District.
W.A(MD)No.799 of 2022 03.08.2022