1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 25.07.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR W.P.(MD).No.8246 of 2011 And M.P.(MD).No. 1 of 2011 Mrs.Indira ... Petitioner -Vs- 1. The Director Tamilnadu Primary Education Office of Tamilnadu Primary Education Director Chennai - 6 Tamilnadu 2. The District Collector District Collector Office Tiruneveli District 3. The Chief Educational Officer Office of Tirunelveli Chief Educational Officer Tirunelveli - 9 4. The District Elementary Educational Officer Office of Tirunelveli District Elementary Educational Officer Tirunelveli 5. The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer Office of Assistant Elementary Educational Officer Tirunelveli 6. M.A.Soosai ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the third respondent to initiate appropriate legal action against the 6th respondent for the willful non compliance of the condition enumerated in the circular dated 18.09.2009 bearing number Na.Ka.No. 11803/A4/09. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Selvaraj For RR 1 to 5 : Mr.S.Chandrasekar Government Advocate O R D E R The petitioner, a Correspondent representing Annai Therasa Nursery & Primary School, Tirunelveli District, has sought for a Mandamus directing the Chief Educational Officer, Office of Tirunelveli Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli - 9, the third respondent herein, to take legal action https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 against Mr.M.A.Soosai, Correspondent, Royal City English School, Sankaran Kovil, Tirunelveli District, for wilful non-compliance of the condition in the circular dated 18.09.2009 bearing number Na.Ka.No. 11803/A4/09, which prescribes certain conditions to start primary schools. 2. It is the grievance of the petitioner that the petitioner's school is recognized to start classes from LKG to 5th Standard for the period of 08.10.2001 to 07.10.2004 and thereafter, recognition was renewed upto 08.10.2001 to 07.10.2004. It is the further contention that she made application to the Chief Educational Officer, Office of Tirunelveli Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli - 9, to renew the recognition from 08.10.2007 to 07.10.2010 for another period of three years. Pursuant to which, permission has been granted by the District Elementary Educational Officer, Office of Tirunelveli District Elementary Educational Officer, Tirunelveli, dated Nil.03.2011, and that renewal has been granted from 08.10.2010 to 07.02.2011 subject to certain conditions. In the meanwhile, the sixth respondent, namely, Royal City English School, has started a School without obtaining prior permission from the competent authority. As a result of which, 100 of students have left from the petitioner's School, without obtaining transfer certificates and joined in that School. 3. According to the petitioner that she made representations dated 17.05.2011, 21.06.2010, 12.07.2010 and 09.07.2010, to the respondents to take action against the sixth respondent, and so far, no action has been taken and in these circumstances, the petitioner has come forward with the present Writ Petition, for the Mandamus stated supra. 4. It is the further grievance of the petitioner that the sixth respondent has not obtained. No objection certificate from the petitioner to run a School within the restricted distance, as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Recognized Private Schools Regulations Act 1973 and the rules made thereunder. 5. The allegation as to whether the sixth respondent School has started a Primary School without due recognition and satisfied the conditions stipulated in the Tamil Nadu Recognized Private Schools Regulations Act 1973 and the rules made thereunder, is certainly a matter to be looked into. If students are admitted without due recognition from the competent authority, then there is every possibility that their career would be affected. 6. In such view of the matter and considering the averments in supporting affidavit, Mr.S.Chandrasekar, learned Government Advocate was put on notice and heard. He submitted that the Educational Authorities would look into the representations and consider the same. His submission is placed on record. 7. Though the petitioner has sought for a Mandamus, directing the third respondent herein to take appropriate legal action against the sixth respondent for wilful non-compliance of the order, dated 18.09.2009, this Court is not inclined to issue any Mandamus, without hearing the sixth respondent. However, having regard to the allegations stated supra, a direction is issued to the third respondent, to consider the representations if acknowledged and pending, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of representation. The petitioner is also permitted to send a copy of the representation, dated 09.07.2010 along https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 with this order. The sixth respondent to be given an opportunity to put forth his contentions, so as to avoid further litigation. 8. With the above said directions, this Writ Petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs. Sd/- Deputy Registrar (Writs) /True copy/ Assistant Registrar To 1. The Director Tamilnadu Primary Education Office of Tamilnadu Primary Education Director Chennai - 6 Tamilnadu 2. The District Collector District Collector Office Tiruneveli District 3. The Chief Educational Officer Office of Tirunelveli Chief Educational Officer Tirunelveli - 9 4. The District Elementary Educational Officer Office of Tirunelveli District Elementary Educational Officer Tirunelveli 5. The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer Office of Assistant Elementary Educational Officer Tirunelveli +1. CC to the Special Government Pleader, Sr.NO.24483 vsg W.P.(MD).No.8246 of 2011 And M.P.(MD).No. 1 of 2011 25.07.2011 TR : 05.08.2011: 3p/7c https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/