IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED:10.03.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P.No.19349 of 2010 Iruthaya Amala Kumari S. ... Petitioner Vs. 1.The Director of Matriculation Schools, Cuddalore. 2.The Inspector of Matriculation Schools, Cuddalore. 3.The Secretary, Arch Diocesan Board of Education, Puducherry. 4.The Principal, St.Paul's Matriculation Higher Secondary School, Block - 29, Neyveli - 607 803, Cuddalore District. ... Respondents PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue Writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of the representation dated 07.07.2010 given by the petitioner and grant such other reliefs. For Petitioner :Mr.R.Gururaj For Respondents :Mr.S.Naganathan GA(Edu) for R1 & R2 R3 & R4 : No Appearance ORDER The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking issuance of writ of mandamus directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 07.07.2010. 2. The petitioner, after her appointment as a Kinder Garten Teacher, was ousted from the said post and subsequently, she has got https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ reappointment on permanent basis from 1995-96. After serving some time, in view of her husband's employment at Quwait, she has also decided to join with him for few months. On that basis, she applied for leave and after availing ten days leave, the petitioner went abroad and subsequent thereto, she wanted to rejoin with the 3rd respondent school after coming back to India. Accordingly, on 04.04.2009, she gave leave application for seeking leave between June 2009 and December 2009 and on considering the petitioner's request, the leave was granted. After taking leave, the petitioner went abroad and joined with her husband, but the condition therein did not suit the petitioner and her children, therefore, she decided to come back to India earlier than the original plan. After coming back to India, she met the respondents 3 and 4, but she was informed that a temporary staff has already been appointed in her place. Therefore, she has sent her representation dated 29.12.2009 to the respondents 3 and 4 and also to the Bishop, incharge of the said school, but since there was no response, the petitioner has filed a writ petition in W.P.No.6461/2010 before this Court and this Court, by order dated 01.04.2010, while dealing with her prayer to issue a direction to the respondent to give her suitable orders to the petitioner to rejoin duty as teacher in the school run by the 4th respondent, this Court dismissed the writ petition holding that when there are no matters pending before the concerned authorities, the question of this Court giving direction to the authorities to place the petitioner back to the respondent school was not feasible. However, an observation was made therein to the effect that it was open to the petitioner to approach the authorities under the Act with appropriate application setting out her grievance. In view of the said observation, the petitioner has filed a representation dated 07.07.2010, but, since the said representation has not been considered till date, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition with the aforesaid prayer. 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the 2nd respondent is the Appellate Authority, but there is no order against which the present representation dated 07.07.2010 has been filed by the petitioner for his consideration and disposal. This Court also by order dated 01.04.2010 has specifically mentioned that when there is no matter pending before the concerned authorities, the question of this Court giving direction to the authorities to place the petitioner back to the respondent school was not feasible. Therefore, no more direction can be given as prayed for. 4. In the case of the petitioner, she was employed as a Kinder Garten Teacher in the 3rd respondent school. It is admittedly true that the petitioner has taken leave to meet her husband, who is working in Quwait, but after coming back, the respondents 3 and 4 are not willing to take her back, as another Teacher was already appointed in her place, therefore, this Court cannot give a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the petitioner representation. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5. In result, this Court finding no merit in the writ petition dismisses the same. No Costs. rkm Sd/ Assistant Registrar /True Copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Director of Matriculation Schools, Cuddalore. 2.The Inspector of Matriculation Schools, Cuddalore. 3.The Secretary, Arch Diocesan Board of Education, Puducherry. 4.The Principal, St.Paul's Matriculation Higher Secondary School, Block - 29, Neyveli – 607 +1cc to Mr.R.Gururaj, Advocate Sr.17480 +1cc to the Government Pleader Sr.17641 W.P.No.19349/2010 BK(CO) rvr 20/04/2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/