IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATE: 15-12-2010 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.JAICHANDREN Writ Petition No.25318 of 2010 1. R.Kannan (Minor) rep by his father K. Ravi 2. B.Daarini (Minor) rep by her guardian V. Elavarasan 3. V.Vidya (Minor) rep by her father K. Viswanathan 4. S.Brinda (Minor) rep by her father S. Sellathurai 5. S.Divya (Minor) rep by her father S. Subramanian 6. M.Maheshwari (Minor) rep by her father G. Marimuthu 7. A.Karikalan 8. R.Raghul (Minor) rep by his guardina S. Kalaiarasan 9. E.Puthiyavan (Minor) rep by father Elavarasan .. Petitioners. Versus 1.The Joint Director of School Education (Higher Secondary-Vocational) College Road, Chennai-600 006. 2.Chief Educational Officer, Thiruvarur. 3.The Headmistress Government Thiruvalluvar Higher Secondary School, Alangottai, Thiruvarur District. .. Respondents. Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the third respondent to retransfer the petitioners to the Accountancy and Auditing Group from the Arts Group in the 3rd respondent school. For Petitioners : Mr.R.Saravanakumar For Respondents : Ms.Dakshayani Reddy Additional Government Pleader O R D E R Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2. It has been stated that the petitioners had been admitted in the Vocational Group, namely, Accountancy and Auditing, by the third respondent school, during the month of June, 2010. The classes for the said course had commenced, from 1.6.2010. Since then, the petitioners had been attending the classes in Accountancy and Auditing. While so, on 8.10.2010, the petitioners were informed by the third respondent school that they cannot continue in the Accountancy and Auditing course, as the said course had been wound up, as per the government orders, in G.O.(Ms).No.8 School Education (VE) Department and G.O.(Ms).No.9 School Education (VE) Department, dated 6.1.2009, wherein, it had been stated that no new vocational courses should be started, from the academic year 2007-2008, if the students strength is found to be less than fifteen. 3. The main contention of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners is that the third respondent school, having admitted the petitioners in the Accountancy and Auditing Group, in plus one, ought not to have shifted the petitioners to the Arts Group. He had also submitted that the said decision of the third respondent school is arbitrary and illegal and that it would cause irreparable damage to the academic career of the petitioners. 4. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the second respondent, it has been stated that in the year, 2007, the Government of Tamil Nadu had formed a High level committee, vide G.O.Ms.No.128, School Education Department, dated 12.6.2007, to review the status of the vocational education courses offered in Higher Secondary Schools, in the State of Tamil Nadu, and to revamp vocational education. 5. Based on the recommendations made by the high level committee on vocational education, the Director of School Education had been directed to initiate follow up action. Accordingly, the Government of Tamilnadu had issued government orders, in G.O.(Ms). No.8 School Education (VE) Department and G.O.(Ms).No.9 School Education (VE) Department, dated 6.1.2009, according to which vocational courses, with less than fifteen students, ought to be closed down. 6. In view of the said government orders, the third respondent school ought to have closed down the vocational course in Accountancy and Auditing. The third respondent school ought not to have permitted the petitioners to continue their studies in the Accountancy and Auditing course, contrary to the said government orders. It has also been stated that the students, who were in the Accountancy and Auditing course, had been shifted to the Arts group, with the consent of the parents. The parents had given a written consent for their wards to be shifted to the Arts group. In such circumstances, the petitioners cannot insist that they should be https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ permitted to continue their studies in the vocational group in Accountancy and Auditing. 7. In view of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the second respondent and in view of the submissions made by the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the petitioners, as well as the respondents, this Court does not find sufficient cause or reason to grant the reliefs, as prayed for by the petitioners, in the present writ petition. Even if the petitioners had been admitted in the Accountancy and Auditing course, it cannot be said that they are entitled to continue their course in the said vocational group, in spite of the government orders, in G.O.(Ms).No.8 School Education (VE) Department and G.O.(Ms).No.9 School Education (VE) Department, dated 6.1.2009. It is also noted that the parents of the petitioners had given their consent to shift the petitioners to the Arts group. After they had been shifted the petitioners had been continuing their studies in the Arts Group, from 4.10.2010. As such, the writ petition is devoid of merits. Hence, it stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Asst.Registrar. /true copy/ Sub Asst.Registrar. csh To 1.The Joint Director of School Education (Higher Secondary-Vocational) College Road, Chennai-600 006. 2.The Chief Educational Officer, Thiruvarur. 3.The Headmistress Government Thiruvalluvar Higher Secondary School, Alangottai, Thiruvarur District. 1 cc to Government Pleader, Sr. 89774 1 cc to Mr.R. Saravanakumar, Sr. 89750 Writ Petition No.25318 of 2010 RL (CO) kk 11/1 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/