1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 11.08.2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI and THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH W.A.(MD)No.749 of 2011 and M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2011 and Caveat (MD)No.819 of 2011 Unaice Grana ... Appellant Vs. 1.The District Elementary Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli. 2.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Kalakad, Tirunelveli District. 3.S.Jesuraj ... Respondents Prayer: The Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent Act, against the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD)No.13086 of 2010, dated 26.04.2011. Petitioner filed under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying for issuance of a writ of certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the first respondent in his order vide O.Mu.No.6346/A4/10 dated 05.10.2010 returning the application for transfer of management of UASS Primary School at Inam Thiruvaranganai, Eruvadi Post, Nanguneri Taluk, Tirunelveli District and quash the same the consequently direct the first respondent to give approval for the change of educational agency and transfer of correspondentship on his basis of the Joint application dated 01.08.2010 submitted by the petitioner and his father. For Appellant : Mr.M.Ajmal Khan For Respondents : Mr.R.Karthikeyan, G.A. For R1 and R2 Mr.S.S.Sundar for R3 JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by P.JYOTHIMANI,J.) The Writ Appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 26.04.2011 in W.P.(MD)No.13086 of 2010, by which, the learned Single Judge in the Writ petition filed by the 3rd respondent herein while allowing the same, has set aside the impugned order of the 1st respondent/District Elementary Educational Officer, by which, the 1st respondent while considering the claim of the 3rd respondent to change the educational agency of the school based on a settlement deed dated 06.05.2011, executed by his father on the objection made by the appellant herein, returned the papers without passing any orders. 2.It was in those circumstances, the learned Single Judge while considering elaborately the entire issue threadbare found that the 3rd https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 respondent has succeeded in the educational agency by virtue of the settlement deed executed by his father, who was admittedly the previous educational agency and set aside the impugned order. We do not find any reason to interfere with the order passed by the learned Single Judge. 3.Accordingly the Writ Appeal stands dismissed. However, if the appellant has got any right to challenge the settlement deed, it is for him to workout his remedy in the manner known to law. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (AS) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The District Elementary Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli. 2.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Kalakad,Tirunelveli District. +1CC TO MR.S.SIVA THILAKAR, ADVOCATE SR.27188 nbj SR : 25.08.2011 : 2p/4c W.A.(MD)No.749 of 2011 11.08.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/