1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 03.03.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.DHANAPALAN Writ Petition (MD).No.170 of 2011 The Correspondent RC High School Kundukulam, Puthur Via, Nagamugunthankudi post, Sivagangai District-630 709. .. Petitioner Vs. 1.The State of Tamilnadu Rep.by its Secretary Department of School Education Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Director of School Education College Road, Chennai 600 006. 3.The Joint Director of School Education (Secondary Education) College Road, Chennai - 600 006. 4.The Chief Educational Officer Sivagangai District Collectorate Campus Sivagangai-630 561. 5.The District Educational Officer Sivagangai, Collectorate Campus Sivagangai District - 630 561. 6.The District Elementary Educational Officer Sivagangai District, Collectorate Campus, Sivagangai - 630 561. 7.The Assistant Elementary Education Officer Elayankudi, Sivagangai District. .. Respondents Prayer:- Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the fourth respondent, Chief Educational Officer to forward the petitioner's proposal, dated 08.10.2010 to the 3rd respondent Joint Director, and further directing the 3rd respondent Joint Director to consider and pass orders forthwith on the proposal for the grant of recognition to the High School Sections (standards IX and X). For Petitioner : Mr.S.Xavier Rajini For Respondents: Mr.So.Paramasivam Government Advocate https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 ORDER By consent, the writ petition itself is taken up for disposal. 2. Heard Mr.S.Xavier Rajini learned counsel for petitioner and Mr.So.Paramasivam, learned Government Advocate for respondents. 3. The prayer in the writ petition is to direct the fourth respondent, namely the Chief Educational Officer to forward the petitioner's proposal, dated 08.10.2010 to the 3rd respondent, namely Joint Director of School Education, and for a further direction to the 3rd respondent to consider and pass orders forthwith on the proposal for the grant of recognition to the High School Sections (standards IX and X). 4. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner's school is a recognised and Aided Minority Educational Institution owned and administered by the Roman Catholic Diocese of Sivagangai and it is one among the 122 recognised Educational Institution owned and administered by the Diocese in the Revenue Districts of Sivagangai and Ramnad. The petitioner's school was established as a Primary School in the year 1951 and was upgraded as Middle School in the year 1994 and thereafter, upgraded as High School in the year 2008. The petitioner school offering education from Standard I to X. As the total strength of the school is increased, they have started standards IX and X, for which a proposal has submitted to the third respondent on 11.04.2008 by the petitioner seeking recognition to the High School Sections (Standard IX and X). However, the proposal was returned. Thereafter, the petitioner resubmitted the proposal for recognition to the Chief Educational Officer on 08.10.2010 indicating that the petitioner school is a minority institution and also enclosing necessary documents. Pending consideration of the same, the petitioner has approached this Court. 5. The fifth respondent has filed counter affidavit and admitted the establishment of the school and also the upgradation of the High School in the year 2008. However, in paragraph 5 of the counter, it is stated that a portion of the building, under which the students studying in standards IX and X were accommodated, was built of asbestos sheets. As per rules, the building should be of concrete roof inasmuch as the asbestos sheet roofing is injurious to the health of the students studying in the school. Unmindful of the health conditions of the students, the petitioner school submitted the proposal for recognition and this was the main reason for not granting the recognition. It is also stated in the counter affidavit that the petitioner school removed the asbestos roof only in the month of September 2010 and replaced by concrete roofing. The proposals for recognition is considered only when the conditions contained in rule 9 are satisfied. the delay is caused due to the negligence of the petitioner school alone. It is further stated in the counter that the petitioner school has submitted the proposals after rectifying the defects and after providing concrete roofing only in October 2010. The entire proposals are under scrutiny and necessary orders will be issued on seeing that the conditions are satisfied as per the Rules, since it is a requirement for obtaining the recognition of the school concerned. 6. On the above background pleadings, the learned counsel for petitioner submits that since rectification has been done by the petitioner and the proposal was submitted to the respondent concerned, namely the third https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 respondent and it is also stated by the respondents that the proposals are under scrutiny, he would plead before this Court that if the third respondent, namely the Joint Director of School Education, is directed to consider the proposal and pass orders, the petitioner would be satisfied. 7. In the light of the above submissions and considering the limited relief sought for by the petitioner to direct the fourth respondent to forward the proposal, dated 08.10.2010 to the third respondent and also considering the fact that the proposal is now under the scrutiny of the third respondent, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the third respondent is directed to consider the proposal of the petitioner school, dated 08.10.2010, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and on merits, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, as the petitioner has expressed urgency that there will be examinations in the first week of April 2011. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(P&A) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Secretary,The State of TamilNadu, Department of School Education Fort St. George, Chennai-600 009. 2.The Director of School Education College Road, Chennai 600 006. 3.The Joint Director of School Education (Secondary Education) College Road, Chennai - 600 006. 4.The Chief Educational Officer Sivagangai District,Collectorate Campus Sivagangai-630 561. 5.The District Educational Officer Sivagangai, Collectorate Campus Sivagangai District - 630 561. 6.The District Elementary Educational Officer Sivagangai District,Collectorate Campus, Sivagangai - 630 561. 7.The Assistant Elementary Education Officer Elayankudi, Sivagangai District. +1cc to The Special Govt.Pleader SR.No.11466 +1cc to Mr.Isaac Mohanlal, Advocate SR.No.11132 Order made in W.P.(MD).No.170 of 2011 03.03.2011 jikr PA/08.03.2011/3P/10C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/