1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 03.11.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P(MD)No.12526 of 2011 and M.P(MD)No.1 of 2011 The Correspondent MSC Schools, Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District – 629 163 .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep. By its Secretary,Department of School Education, Fort St. George,Chennai – 600 006. 2.The Director of School Education, College Road,Chennai – 600 006. 3.The Joint Director of School Education, (Higher Secondary), College Road,Chennai – 600 006. 4.The Chief Educational Officer, Kuzhithurai at Marthandam,Kanyakumari District. 5.The District Educational Officer, Kuzhithurai at Marthandam,Kanyakumari District – 629 165. .. Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the second respondent herein to consider and pass orders forthwith on the petitioner's appeal to him dated 02.07.2011 for the grant of recognition/permission to the petitioner School for opening the Higher Secondary Courses (Standards XI and XII) in Tamil Medium under the State Board from the academic year 2010-2011. For Petitioner : Mr.Issac Mohanlal For Respondents : Mrs.S.Bharathi,Government Advocate O R D E R The petitioner/the Correspondent of MSC Schools, Kuzhithurai, Kanyakumari District has come up with the present Writ Petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the second respondent/the Director of School Education to consider the petitioner's appeal, dated 02.07.2011, for the grant of recognition/permission to the petitioner's School for opening the Higher Secondary Courses (Standards XI and XII) in Tamil Medium under the State Board from the academic year 2010-2011. 2. Heard Mr.Issac Mohanlal, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mrs.S.Bharathi, learned Government Advocate, takes notice for the respondents. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 3. By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal. 4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is a Correspondent of 16 Malankara Syrian Diocese of Marthandam, which is a Trust. In an effort to promote the education to the Malankara Syrian Catholic population of the District, the Trust is running 16 Schools in the District of Kanyakumari. They are all recognised and aided as Minority Educational Institutions. The School is also having sufficient qualified teachers and other staff members and that apart, a spacious playgrounds, recreation places, library and Science labs within a area of about 5 acres. 5. While so, considering the low economic capacity and their resultant inability to send their children to distant places for Higher Secondary Education, the Trust decided to start Higher Secondary Classes (Standards XI to XII) offering four groups, namely, i) Maths, Physics, Chemistry and Biology, ii) Maths, Physics, Chemistry and Computer, iii) Physics, Chemistry and Biology, iv) Commerce and Business Maths. 6. Accordingly, a proposal was submitted to the second respondent seeking for up-gradation of the School into a Higher Secondary School (Standards XI and XII) in Tamil Medium under State Board for the Academic Year 2008-2009. The fifth respondent/the District Educational Officer, Kanyakumari returned the proposal, dated 23.04.2008, indicating certain deficiencies with a direction to resubmit the proposal after fulfilling all those deficiencies. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the third respondent/the Joint Director of School Education has granted continuous recognition for standards VI to X from 01.06.2004 to 31.05.2007 in his proceedings, dated 06.04.2009, on the basis of the recommendation of the fourth respondent/the Chief Educational Officer. 8. In the meanwhile, the petitioner rectified the defects and resubmitted the proposal to the second respondent with a request to up- grade into Higher Secondary School for the Academic Year 2010-2011. Again the fifth respondent/the District Educational Officer returned the proposal. Once again, the petitioner rectified the deficiencies and resubmitted the proposal on 24.05.2010. Thereafter, the Chief Educational Officer and the District Educational Officer inspected the School in the month of March, 2010 and after satisfied with the infrastructural arrangements provided in the School, they have also forwarded the proposal with a recommendation to the Joint Director in a proceedings, dated 23.05.2010. 9. When there has been a serious correspondence, finally the request for up-gradation was refused by the third respondent/the Joint Director of School Education (Higher Secondary), Chennai by order dated 31.05.2010. After the order passed by the Joint Director of School Education, the petitioner once again rectified the deficiencies and resubmitted the proposal to the third respondent on 22.11.2010. 10. In the mean while, the fourth respondent issued a show-cause notice, dated 04.11.2010 directing the petitioner to submit his explanation https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 as to why appropriate disciplinary action should not be taken against the petitioner's School for admitting the students in Standard XI for the year 2010-11 without obtaining proper permission from the Department. 11. In view of the fact that the said order, dated 31.05.2010 has become final, the petitioner preferred an appeal to the second respondent, dated 02.07.2011. But the said appeal till date has not considered for proper disposal, which compelled the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the Writ Petition by way of Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 12. The learned Government Advocate after taking notice submits that if the appeal is in order, the same would be disposed of in accordance with law if sufficient time is granted therefor. 13. Recording the submission, as the appeal has not been disposed of, this Court directs the second respondent to dispose of the appeal in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 14. With the above observation, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. SD ASST REGISTRAR(RECORDS) /TRUE COPY/ SUB ASST REGISTRAR ps To 1.The Secretary, The State of Tamil Nadu, Departmesnt of School Education,Fort St. George,Chennai – 600 006. 2.The Director of School Education, College Road,Chennai – 600 006. 3.The Joint Director of School Education, (Higher Secondary), College Road,Chennai – 600 006. 4.The Chief Educational Officer, Kuzhithurai at Marthandam,Kanyakumari District.629 165 5.The District Educational Officer, Kuzhithurai at Marthandam,Kanyakumari District – 629 165. 1CC To M/s.Isaac Mohanlal, Advocate in SR No.38017 SB:14/12/2011 3P 7C W.P(MD)No.12526 of 2011 03.11.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/