1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 30/6/2011 C O R A M THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VENKATARAMAN W.P.(MD) No.5375 of 2011 Minor K.Vaishnavi rep. By her father and Natural guardian Mr.Kannan Tirumangalam. ... Petitioner Vs 1. Director, Government of Examinations, Chennai 6. 2. Director of School Education, Chennai 6. 3. Joint Director of Government Examinations, Regional Office, Madurai 2. 4. Headmistress, Teddy High School, Alampatti, Tirumangalam. ... Respondents Prayer: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records relating to the communication bearing No.Na.Ka.No.43750/E3/2010 dated 23/3/2011 issued by the third respondent and quash the same in so far as it omits to grant the concession of exemption from writing one language examination (English) and consequently directing the third respondent to issue a supplementary order incorporating one more concession "Exemption from writing language examination (English) in the Government Public Examination held for X Standard for the academic year 2010 – 11 in the order bearing Na.Ka.No.43750/E3/2010 dated 23/3/2011. For Petitioner : Mr.G.R.Swaminathan For Respondents : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen AGP. ORDER Challenging the impugned Notification dated 23/3/2011 of the third respondent and for quashing the same in so far as it omits to grant the concession of exemption from writing one language examination (English) and consequently direct the third respondent to issue a supplementary order incorporating one more concession "exemption from writing language examination (English)" in the Government Public Examination held for X Standard for the academic year 2010 – 2011, the present writ petition is laid. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 2. It is the case of the petitioner that his daughter minor K.Vaishnavi is suffering from multiple disabilities congenital diseases. She has hearing impairment, her vision is extremely low. She has physical abnormalities and also she is suffering from mental retardation to the extent of 50%. Thus, she is having several disabilities. She has been therefore, put in the fourth respondent School. She has completed X standard. 3. In view of her ailment, the School has requested the authorities to permit the petitioner/minor as well as the other students viz., Vignesh and Gurunathan to avail the following three exemptions, viz., (i). Extra one hour (ii). Exemption from writing one language examination. (iii). Use of scribe. She has been allowed to write the examination with the help of a scribe. Unfortunately, it was understood that the minor petitioner has also been exempted from writing one language examination. However, the third respondent has taken serious exception about the exemption granted by the School. Though the School Management has personally met the third respondent several times and requested to issue a supplementary concessional order the same was turned down by the third respondent. If supplementary order is not issued, the petitioner will be automatically a failed candidate. Therefore, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition praying for the relief as stated therein. 4. A counter affidavit was filed on behalf of the third respondent putting forth the following contentions. The Director of Government Examinations, in a letter dated 4/10/2010 called proposals from the District Educational Officer from the School candidates deserving educational concessions through the Headmasters of the School concerned. As such the Headmistress of the Teddy High School, Alampatty, Thirumangalam has submitted a proposal regarding the disabilities of three students viz., Vignesh, Gurunathan and the petitioner's daughter Vaishnavi, to the District Educational Officer, Usilampatti. The District Educational Officer, Usilampatti, sent a proposal to the third respondent by his proceedings dated 4/11/2010 enclosing the medical certificate of the three students. On verification of the medical certificate, it has been found that the students viz., Vignesh and Gurunathan are mentally retarded children and therefore, they were granted one language exemption and the extra one hour time for writing examination as per G.O.(Rt) No.28 School Education (V1) Department dated 10/2/2010. In the medical certificate of the petitioner, it is stated that she is having multiple disability. The concession envisaged in G.O.(Rt) No.28 School Education (V1) Department dated 10/2/2010 cannot be shown to the petitioner. Thus, the counter affidavit seeks for the dismissal of the writ petition. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 5. On the basis of the above pleadings, I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. 6. It is not in dispute that the petitioner is suffering from multiple disabilities. The School concerned also addressed a communication to the third respondent requesting him to show the benefit of the following three exemptions viz., (1). Extra one hour (ii). Exemption from writing one language examination. (iii).Use of scribe. However, the third respondent has acceded permission only to Vignesh and Gurunathan and rejected the claim of the petitioner for exemption from writing one language examination. Perhaps the third respondent was under the impression that only mentally retarded persons are entitled for such concession. It is stated that the petitioner is suffering from multiple disabilities viz., hearing impairment, her vision is extremely low and suffering from mental retardation to the extent of 50%. In fact, additional typed set has been filed wherein, in the medical certificate, Dr.C.Ramasubramanian, Co-ordinator Mental Health Programme, Government Rajaji Hospital, Madurai has certified that the petitioner was suffering from mental retardation and the disability level is 60%. That apart, when the petitioner is suffering from multiple disabilities including mental retardation. The third respondent instead of considering the case of the petitioner in a sympathetic way has failed to give exemption to her from writing one language examination. It is nothing but a wooden approach by the third respondent. 7. In view of the above stated position, I am inclined to set aside the proceeding of the third respondent dated 23/3/2011 and the third respondent is directed to grant concession of exemption from writing one language examination (English) in the Government Public Examination held for X Standard examination for the academic year 2010 – 11. The said exercise has to be carried out by the third respondent within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 8. This writ petition is ordered accordingly. No costs. Consequently, the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar(AE) /TRUE COPY/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1. Director,Government of Examinations,Chennai 6. 2. Director of School Education,Chennai 6. 3. Joint Director of Government Examinations, Regional Office,Madurai 2. +1cc to The Special Govt.Pleader SR.No.21146 W.P.(MD)No.5375 of 2011 mvs 30/6/2011 PA/27.07.2011/3P/5C https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/