M.Senthil v. The Chief Educational Officer
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 16.07.2025
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN M.Senthil ... Petitioner Vs
1. The Chief Educational Officer, Office of the Chief Educational Officer, Ramanathapuram.
2. The Block Educational Officer, Office of the Block Educational, Kamuthi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.
... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents to initiate action by conducting detailed enquiry following the Principles of Natural Justice by summoning all the concerned parties and obtaining the written statement regarding the misappropriation of the Perunazhi Dhakshinathu Saiva Velalar Vuravin Muraikku Paathiyamana Primary School Board's funds without proper signatures of the Executive members for the resolution based on the petitioner's 1/5
representation, dated 24.02.2025.
For petitioner : Mr. M.Karthikeya Venkitachalapathy For respondents : Mr.P.T.Thiraviam Government Advocate *****
ORDER
This Writ Petition is disposed of at the time of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Government Advocate for the respondents.
2. The petitioner claims himself as an Executive Committee Member of the Perunazhi Dhakshinathu Saiva Velalar Vuravin Muraikku Paathiyamana Primary School Board in Ramanathapuram District.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that the Secretary of the aforesaid Executive Committee of the school, along with the Principal, Head Mistress and her husband as also relatives have been misappropriated the fund given by the Government and therefore, the petitioner has given a representation, dated 2/5
24.02.2025 to take action against the above mentioned persons. Despite the same, no action has been taken.
4. It is submitted that the petitioner has also attempted to get information under Right to Information Act, 2005 regarding the resolution, which is purportedly signed by the petitioner and other Executive Committee Members. However, it has not been furnished.
5. The learned Government Advocate for the second respondent submits that the petitioner's representation, dated 24.02.2025 will be considered and disposed of on merits within a period eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
6. Recording the above submission of the learned counsel for the second respondent, who takes notice on the first respondent as well, this Writ Petition is disposed of by directing the second respondent to consider the petitioner's representation, dated 24.02.2025 in accordance with law within a period eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, after due notice to the persons named in the complaint.
3/5
7. This Writ Petition is disposed of, with the above observations. No costs. Index : Yes / No 16.07.2025 Internet : Yes / No apd To
1. The Chief Educational Officer, Office of the Chief Educational Officer, Ramanathapuram.
2. The Block Educational Officer, Office of the Block Educational, Kamuthi Taluk, Ramanathapuram District.
4/5
C.SARAVANAN, J.
apd 16.07.2025 5/5