1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 22.07.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.MANIKUMAR W.P.(MD)Nos.2878 & 7107 of 2011 and M.P.(MD) No.2 of 2011 1.Sivaram Girls High School, Rep.by its Secfretary, Mamasapuram, Srivilliputhur Taluk, Virudhunagar District. .. Petitioner in WP.2878/2011 2.S.Puthiyaraj Rep.by his guardian, P.Sundaram. 3.Arunkumar Rep.by his guardian, Manivannan 4.A.Kannan Rep.by his guardian, Alagarsamy. 5.K.Sathishkumar Rep.by his guardian, Kalimuthu. 6.V.Vignesh @ Rakkappan Rep.by his guardian, Vairamuthu. 7.S.Rajasundar Rep.by his guardian, S.Subbiah 8.V.Ramkumar, Rep.by his guardian, Vellaichamy. 9.R.Tamilventhan, Rep.by his guardian, Rajendran. 10.V.Ganeshkumar Rep.by his guardian, Balasubramaniam, 11.K.Saravanakumar, Rep.by his guardian, Kamaraj. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 12.K.Selvam Rep.by his guardian, Kanthavel. 13.T.Sowndarrajan, Rep.by his guardian, Thangam. 14.T.Karthick, Rep.by his guardian, Tharmaraj. 15.S.Sathishkumar, Rep.by his guardian, S.Padmarani. 16.N.Prasanna, Rep.by his guardian, N.Rajeswari. 17.D.Senthilvel, Rep.by his guardian, Durairathinam. 18.P.Guhendran, Rep.by his guardian, Balasundaram. ... Petitioners in WP.7197/2011 Vs. 1.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai-6. 2.The Director of Government Examination, Directorate of School Examination, College Road, Chennai.-6. 3.The Chief Educational Officer, Virudhunagar District. 4.The Regional Deputy Director, Govt.Examinations, Office of the Regional Deputy Director, Madurai – 5. 5.The District Educational Officer, Virudhunagar. ..1 to 5th Respondents in both Wps. 6.Sivaram Girls High School, Rep.by its Secretary, Mamasapuram, Virudhunagar District. ..6th Respondent in WP.7107/11 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 3 PRAYER IN W.P.(MD)2878/2011: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the Order in the proceeding vide in Na.Ka.No.07327/E4/2010, dated 15.11.2010 of the 4th respondent herein and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents herein to include into the list, the name of the 17 boy students studying in Standard X in petitioner's School herein and permit them to appear for the S.S.L.C. Examinations to be held on 28.03.2011. PRAYER IN W.P.(MD)7107/2011: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to publish 10th Std SSLC exam results of 17 boy students of Sivaram Girls High School, Mamasapuram. The 17 boy students had written Xth Std., SSLC examination on 28.03.2011 as per the interim direction of this Court and other reliefs. For Petitioners :Mr.P.Mahendran in WP.2878/2011 AND Mr.G.R.Swaminathan in WP.7107/2011 For Respondents :Mr.S.Chandrasekar (R1 to R5) Govt.Advocate COMMON ORDER In W.P.2878 of 2011, Sivaram Girls High School, Mamasapuram, Srivilliputhur Taluk, Virudhunagar District, has sought for a Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the order dated 15.11.2008 of the Regional Deputy Director, Government Examinations, Madurai, the 4th respondent herein, and consequently, prayed for a direction to the respondents to include the list containing 17 boy students studying in Standard X in petitioner School and permit them to appear for the SSLC Examinations, scheduled on 28.03.2011. 2.In W.P.No.7107 of 2011, 17 boy students, who have completed the X Standard in Sivaram Girls High School, Mamasapuram, Srivilliputhur Taluk, Virudhunagar District, has sought for a Mandamus, directing the respondents to publish the results of X Standard SSLC examination held on 28.03.2011. 3.Record of proceedings shows that by order dated 11.03.2011 in M.P. (MD)No.1 of 2011 in W.P.(MD)No.2878 of 2011, this Court has granted permission to the students to write the SSLC examinations. Though in M.P.(MD)No.2 of 2011 in the said Writ Petition, the petitioner School sought for a direction to the Director of Government Examination, Chennai and the Regional Deputy Director, Government Examinations, Madurai, respectively, the respondents, 2 and 4 herein, to publish the result and issue the Mark Statements for the Examinations held on 28.03.2011 in respect of 17 boy students, this Court, rejected the relief on the ground that it cannot be granted at that stage, without deciding the main issue. 4.As the issue involved in both the writ petitions pertain to examinations and publication of results of 17 boy students, who have undergone their studies for the academic year 2009-10 in Sivaram Girls High School, Mamasapuram, Srivilliputhur Taluk, Virudhunagar District, this Court deems it fit to dispose of both the writ petitions by a common order. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 4 5.The petitioner Sivaram Girls High School, Mamasapuram, Srivilliputhur Taluk, Virudhunagar District, represented by the Secretary, in W.P.No.2878 of 2011, has submitted that Sri Kandasamy Educational Charitable Trust is running two schools viz., (i) Sivaram Elementary Schools and (ii) Sivaram Girls High School, Mamasapuram, Srivilliputhur Taluk, Virudhunagar District. The Girls High School was recognized by the Chief Educational Officer, Virudhunagar District , the third respondent herein, vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.420/D5/95, dated 05.01.1996, for the commencement of X Standard, without grant in aid (self finance). The School Administration has sent a proposal, dated 29.12.2004, to the Director of School Education, Chennai, the first respondent herein, for conversion of the School from Girls High Schools to that of Co-education High School. According to the School, the administration intended to fulfil the aspiration of the villagers and refugees, Sri Langan Tamils at Mamasapuram and to prevent the students from drop out, from the School after VIII Standard. The Director of School Education, Chennai, returned the application for some clarifications and that the application was resubmitted on 31.03.2005. Again, the application was returned to rectify some of the defects and after complying with, it was resubmitted on 10.12.2009. According to the petitioner, the resubmitted application is pending consideration on the file of the Director of School Education, Chennai, the first respondent herein. The Chief Educational Officer, Virudhunagar District, the 3rd respondent, has also sent a report on the proposal, for conversion of the Girls High School to that of Co-education School, vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.192/215/2010, dated 13.01.2011, and that the same is pending before the first respondent. As the application is pending consideration for sometime, the School was constrained to file W.P.(MD)No.2653 of 2011, seeking for a direction to the respondents to approve the proposal dated 10.12.2009 sent by the School. This Court, by order dated 07.03.2011, directed the respondents therein, to consider the proposals within a period of ten days from the date of receipt of a copy of that order. 6.The petitioner School has further submitted that while the application dated 29.12.2004 of the School for conversion was pending consideration, the Director of Government Examination, Chennai, the second respondent herein, on his own permitted the boy students admitted in X Standard for the examinations in the academic year 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09. The School legitimately expected that permission would be granted for the students, who were admitted during the academic year 2009-10 also. When the request to grant permission for 17 boy students was denied, the School was again constrained to file W.P.(MD)No.59 of 2002. Most of the Students are villagers and refugees Sri Langan Tamil. While disposing of the writ petition, this Court, by order dated 29.09.2010, passed the following orders:- “Admittedly, by virtue of interim direction, the male students of the petitioner institution have written the examination. In view of the same, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks withdrawal of the writ petition, since the prayer has become infructuous. However, he would submit that for the year 2010-11, similar order has been passed by the 4th respondent denying permission to the male students to write the examinations and hence, he is seeking liberty to challenge the said order. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 5 In view of the same, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous. However, liberty is give to the petitioner to challenge the order said to have been passed for the year 2010-2011. No costs. Consequently, connected M.P.(MD)No.1 of 2010 is dismissed.” 7.Since the Regional Deputy Director, Government Examinations, Madurai, the 4th respondent in the said writ petition, has denied permission to the boy students to appear for the examinations 2010-11, vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.07327/E4/2010, dated 15.11.2010, the petitioner is constrained to file the present writ petition. 8.According to the School, during the academic year 2009-10, the School admitted 22 boy students in the 9th Standard. In that, 17 students were promoted to 10th Standard and the promotion list was approved by the District Educational Officer, Virudhunagar, the 5th respondent herein. According to School, the life and the education career of the students are involved and therefore, he sought for a direction to publish the results of the students, whose names withheld, under the orders of this Court. 9.In W.P.(MD)No.7707 of 2011, 17 boy students, who were admitted in Standard IX during the academic year 2009-10 and promoted to Standard X and undergone their studies during the academic year 2010-11, have approached this Court through their guardians for a Mandamus. According to them, though they have passed in the SSLC examinations, held on 28.03.2011 and the results have been withheld. Most of them are with village background and some of them are refugees Sri, Langan Tamils. It is their further contention that even assuming that there is a mistake committed by the School, inadvertently, they should not be penalized. 10.The Secretary, Sivaram Girls High School, Mamasapuram, Virudhunagar District, has filed an additional affidavit, dated 20th July 2011, stating that no boy students have been admitted to Standard IX in the petitioner School for this academic year 2011-12 and all the 17 boy students, who studied in Standard X in the petitioner School have been relieved by issuing necessary Transfer Certificates and most of them joined in Adi Dravidar Welfare High School, Idayankulam. As on today, there is no boy students either in Standard 9 or 10. At paragraph 5 of the additional affidavit, dated 28th July 2011, the Secretary of the School submitted that if the Hon'ble Court feels that the School has committed a mistake, he tenders an unconditional apology and considering the welfare of 17 boy students , who had written the X Standard public examination, he seeks for a direction to the Director of School Education, Chennai, and the Regional Deputy Director, Chennai, to publish the results. 11.The District Educational Officer, Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar, the 5th respondent herein, has submitted that the petitioner School is a recognized High School and that grant is being made for Standards VI to VIII and that the petitioner has been granted recognition to conduct Standards IX and X without any grant. The School is a non-minority institution and was permitted only to run Girls High School, when it was recognized during the year 1996. According to the District Educational https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 6 Officer, Srivilliputhur, the School has admitted male students without prior permission from the Department. When the Regional Deputy Director, Government Examination, Madurai, scrutinized the list of students admitted for SSLC public examinations, it was found that the Management had breached the conditions. He has further submitted that when the School sought for a conversion, the application was returned for want of sufficient records and documents till date. He stated that till, the Director of School Education, Chennai, granted necessary permission for conversion, the School ought not to have admitted male students. It is the further contention that though the petitioner School had admitted male students from 2007-08 onwards, and permission was also granted to those male students to write public examinations, from 2006-07, it should not be construed as valid, as the above was not properly recognized. 12.In addition to the above pleadings and inviting the attention of this Court to the impugned order, dated 15.11.2010, in W.P.(MD)No.2878 of 2011, Mr.S.Chandrasekar, learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents submitted that when the District Educational Officer, Virudhunagar, had already issued a proceedings, dated 1707.2010, instructing the School, not to admit male students and if any admission was granted, the School would be responsible, despite the same, the School, violating the instructions have admitted the male students and that therefore, there is no illegality in refusing to permit the students to take up the examinations for the academic year 2010-11 held on 28.03.2011. He further submitted that it is well settled that admission can be made only when the School is recognized. For the above said reasons, he prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 13.Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the materials available on record. 14. By proceedings dated 05.01.1996, the Chief Educational Officer, Virudhunagar District, has granted permission to the petitioner School to starts Standard X for the academic year 1994-95, without grant, subject to certain conditions. There is no dispute with regard to infrastructure and other requirements to be complied with for conducting X Standard Classes, when recognition was granted for Girls School, Only after necessary instructions and considering the request, permission to start X Standard in the above said School has been granted. Proceedings dated 24.09.2007 of the District Educational Officer, Virudhunagar, shows that permission has been granted for admitting children of Sri Lankan Refugees, for the academic year 2007-08. Material on record shows that when the petitioner made an application on 29.12.2004 for conversion of the Girls High School into that of a Co-education School, the same has been returned for some defects and that there were correspondence, between the School and the Education Department, and some of the defects noticed by the Director of School Education, Chennai, seemed to have been rectified by Sivaram Girls High School, which are as follows:- Fwpg;gpl;L fUj;JUf;fs; jpUg;gp mDg;gg;gl;lJ. BkBy Fwpg;gpl;l FiwghLfis epth;j;jp bra;J kPz;Lk; fUj;JU ghh;it 7y; fz;lgo 5.11.07 md;W tpUJefh; khtl;lf;fy;tp mYtyh; kw;Wk; Kjd;ikf;fy;tp mYtyh; mth;fSf;F rkh;g;gpj;Bjd;. (efy; nizf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ). https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 7 nf;fUj;JUtpy; fPH;f;fz;l FiwghLfs; cs;sjhfj;bjhptpj;J Kjd;ikf;fy;tp mYtyuhy; khtl;lf;fy;tp mYtyUf;F jpUg;gg;gl;L ghh;it 8y; fhZk; fojj;jpd; Kyk; gs;spf;F jpUg;gp mDg;gg;gl;Ls;sJ. tpUJefh; Kjd;ikf;fy;tp mYtyh; mth;fshy; Rl;of;fhl;lg;gl;l FiwghLfs; 1.tFg;giwfs; 16 x 13 mstpy; FWfpajhf cs;sJ. 2.Ma;tf trjp ny;iy. 3.jw;bghGJ cah;epiyg;gs;spa[k;, bjhlf;fg;gs;spa[k; xBu tshfj;jpy; bray;gLfpwJ. bgz;fs; cUthf;Ftjw;F jdpahf tshfk; kw;Wk; tpisahl;olk; mikf;fg;glBtz;Lk;. 4.rj;Jzt[ Tlk; gGjile;Js;sJ, nJ rhpbra;ag;glBtz;Lk;. 5.fHptiwfs; cah;epiyg;gs;spfSf;F jdpj;jdpahf Vw;gLj;jg;glBtz;Lk;. nf;FiwghLfSf;F tpsf;fk; mspj;J ghh;it 9 kw;Wk; 11y; fz;lgo fUj;JUf;fis tpUJefh; khtl;lf;fy;tp mYtyUf;F mDg;gpajpy; ghh;it 10 kw;Wk; 12y; fz;lgo tpUJefh; khtl;lf;fy;tp mYtyhpd; mjpK fojj;jpy; Rl;of;fhl;lg;gl;o Fiwfis KGikahf epth;j;jp bra;J chpa MjhuA;fSld; fUj;JUit kPst[k; mDg;gpitf;f gs;spr;brayh; Bfl;Lf;bfhs;sg;gLfpwhh; vdf;Fwpg;gpl;L jpUg;gg;gl;Ls;sJ. (efy; nizf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ). ghh;it 6y; fhZk; fojj;jpy; gs;spf;fy;tp naf;Feh; mth;fs; Fwpg;gpl;l FiwghLfisa[k; tpUJefh; Kjd;ikf;fy;tp mYyh; mth;fs; Fwpg;gpl;l FiwghL epth;j;jp bra;J fUj;JUit kPst[k; gzpe;J rkh;g;gpf;fpd;Bwd;. gs;spf;fy;tp naf;Feh; mth;fshy; Rl;of;fhl;lg;gl;l Fiwfs; FiwghLfs; epth;j;jp mwpf;if 1.kfsph; cah;epiyg;gs;spahf juk; 9,10 tFg;g[fs; kl;Lk; Raepjpapy; cah;j;j mDkjpa[k;, mA;fPfhuKk; bray;gl;LtUtjhy; gpd;Bdw;g[ tHA;fg;gl;Ls;s ng;gs;spapd; 9 Mizapid vjph;Behf;fp Tamil Nadu kw;Wk; 10 tFg;g[fspy; khzth;fs; Private School Act gf;fk; 27y; ve;j mog;gilapy; Brh;f;fg;gl;Ls;sdh; Twpa[s;sgo Additional Section vd;gjw;fhd tpsf;fk;. Kjd;ikf;fy;tp mYtyh; mth;fBs mDkjp tHA;fyhk; vd Fwpg;gpl;Ls;s goahYk; jA;fspd; Bkyhd cj;jutpid vjph;Behf;fp 2005-06, 2007-07 fy;tp Mz;Lfspy; bjhlh;e;J khzth;fs; Brh;f;if mDkjpf;fg;gl;L fy;tp gapd;W tUfpwhh;fs;. BkYk; nilepiyf;fy;tp muR bghJj;Bjh;t[ 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008- 09 y; Bjh;t[ vGjp 2007-08, 2008-09y; 100% Bjh;r;rp bgw;Ws;sdh; vd;w tpguj;jpid jA;fspd; Bkyhd ftdj;jpw;F bjhpag; g:Lj;JfpBwd;. bkhl;lkiy nyA;if kW thH;tpdh; Kyk; jiytUila tpz;zg;gj;jpd;Bghpy; nk;Kfhkpy; cs;s FHe;ijfshd khzt khztpah;fSf;F fy;tp fpilf;f Btz;Lk; vd;w mog;gilapy; khzth;fs; 9 kw;Wk; 10 tFg;g[fspy; Brh;f;fg;gl;Ls;shh;fs;. njw;fhd mDkjp khtl;lf;fy;tp mYtyuhy; tHA;fg;gl;Ls;sJ. (efy; nizf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ). kk;rhg[uk; fpuhkj;jpy; trpf;Fk; jhH;j;jg;gl;l kw;Wk; kpft[k; gpw;gLj;jg;gl;l khzth;fspd; fy;tp tsh;r;rpia fUjpa[k; ng;gs;spapy; 9 kw;Wk; 10k; tFg;g[fspy; khzth;fs; Brh;f;fg;gl;ldh;. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 8 2. niz naf;Fdh; (nilepiy fy;tp) kk;rhg[uk; rptuhk; eLepiygs;spapy; Miz e.f.vz; 93962/$p1/93, 6,7,8 tFg;g[fspy; gapYk; kfspiu kl;Lk; ehs; 27.7.93 y; rptuhk; eLepiygs;sp gphpj;J rptuhk; (k) cah;epiyg;gs;sp Jtf;f 1993-94k; Mz;oy; 9k; tFg;g[ JtA;fp md;iwa gs;spf;FGthy; fUj;JU rptuhk; (k) cah;epiyg;gs;spahf juk; mDg;gg;gl;ljpy; rptuhk; (k) cah;j;jp mDkjp tHA;fg;gl;Ls;sJ. cah;epiyg;gs;spahf juk; cah;j;jg;gl;L eLepiygs;spapYs;s mDkjp bgwg;gl;Ls;sJ. 6,7,8 k; khztpaiu kl;Lk; gpupj;J kfsph; tFg;g[fspy; gapd;w khztpfis gphpj;J cah;epiyg;gs;sp JtA;fshk; vd kfsph; cah;epiyg;gs;sp juk; cah;j;jg;gl;L mt;thizapy; VJk; Fwpg;gpltpy;iy. gpd;g[ 6,7,8 tFg;g[fspy; gapYk; khzth;fs; rptuhk; eLepiygs;spapy; bjhlh;e;J fy;tp gapd;W tUfpwhh;fs;. rptuhk; eLepiygs;spapYs;s 6,7,8 tFg;g[fspy; gapYk; khzth;fisa[k; rptuhk; (k) eLepiygs;spapy; Brh;e;J nUghyUk; gof;Fk; gs;spahf rptuhk; cah;epiy gs;spahf khw;wpdhy; 6,7,8 tFg;g[fspy; Bghjpf;Fk; Mrphpah;fisa[k; Nh;j;Jf;bfhz;L rptuhk; Jtf;fg;gs;spahf khw;wyhk; vd;gjid gzpt[ld; rkh;g;gpf;fpd;Bwd;. 3. cah;epiyg;gs;spahf juk; hpl; kD 218 d; jPh;g;ghizapy; juk; cah;j;jg;gl;l gpd;dUk; 6,7,8 cah;j;jg;gl;l gs;spfspy; vkJ tFg;g[fs; bjhlf;fg;gs;spahf gs;spiag;Bghd;W bray; gLk; bjhlh;e;J bray;gl Miz VJk; gs;spfs;. bgw;wpUg;gpd; mjd; tpguk;. 1.fiykfs; eLepiyg;gs;sp, jpUj;jA;fs; tpUJefh; khtl;lk; rptRg;gpukzpad; ehlhh; FUtk;khs; bgz;fs; gs;spahfj;juk; cah;j;jg;gl;L gpd;dh; jw;BghJ Bky;epiyg;gs;spahf juk; cah;j;jg;gl;L gpd;dh; jw;BghJ Bky;epiyg;gs;spahf bray;gl;L tUfpwJ. 2.fhh;Bd&d; eLBky;epiyg;gs;sp fhh;Bd&d; bgz;fs; Bky;dpiy gs;spahf bray;gl;L tUfpwJ. 3.rpte;jpgl;o ehlhh; (k) cah;epiy gs;spahf juk; cah;j;jg;gl;L bray;gl;L tUfpwJ. 4. fUj;JUtpy; cs;s Bfhhpf;iff;fhd mtrpak; Fwpj;J jpl;ltl;lkhd Fwpg;g[iw. Kjd;ikf;fy;tp mYtyuhy; Rl;of;fhl;lg;gl;l Fiwf;fhd epth;j;jp mwpf;if. FiwghLfs; epth;j;jp mwpf;if 1.tFg;giwfs; 16 x 13 mstpy; cs;sJ tFg;giwfs; jw;BghJ g[jpjhf khw;wk; bra;J Fwpg;gpl;l mstpy; fl;lg;gl;Ls;sJ (fl;ol gpshd; nizf;fg;gl;Ls;J) https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 9 2.Ma;tf trjp ny;iy. g[jpajhf fl;lg;gl;l gs;sp fl;olj;jpy; Ma;tfj;jpw;fhf jdp nlk; XJf;gl;gl;Ls;sJ. 3.jw;bghGJ bjhlf;fg;gs;spa[k;\ tpisahl;olk; jdpahf gs;sp nUg;gplj;ij cah;epiygs;spa[k; Xbu tshfj;jpy; tpl;L xU fp.kP.bjhiytpy; cs;sJ, jw;BghJ bray;gLfpwJ. bgz;fs; cah;epiyg; cs;s rptuhk; eLepiyg;gs;spf;Fk; gs;sp cUthf;Ftjw;F jdpahf jdpj;jdpahf thapy;fs; tshfk; kw;Wk; tpisahl;olk; Vw;gLj;jg;gl;Ls;sJ. mikf;fg;goBtz;Lk; 4.rj;Jzt[f;Tlk; gLjile;J cs;sJ g[jpjhf fl;lg;gl;l gs;sp tshfj;jpy; nJ rhpbra;a glBtz;Lk; rj;Jzt[f;Tlk; brg;gdplg;gl;L g[jpajhf fl;lg;gl;Ls;sJ. 5.fHptiwfs; cah;epiygs;spfSf;F fHptiwfs; jdpj;jdpahf cs;sJ. jdpj;jdpahf Vw;gLj;jg;glBtz;Lk; gs;spf;fy;tp naf;Fdh; mth;fs; kw;Wk; Kjd;ikf;fy;tp mYtyh; mth;fs; Rl;of;fhl;oa FiwghLfis epth;j;jp bra;Jk;, 9,10 Raepjp tFg;g[fspy; khzth;fs; Brhe;jjw;F gpd;Bdw;g[ mDkjp Btz;oa[k; FUj;JUit kPst[k; gzpe;J rkh;g;gpf;fpd;Bwd;. rptuhk; (k) cah;epiyg;gs;spapy; nUghyUk; gapy;tjw;F rptuhk; cah;epiyg;gs;sp kk;rhg[uk; vd;w bgahpy; bray;gl mDkjp Btz;oa[k; gzpe;J Btz;LfpBwd;." 15.Though, Sivaram Girls High School submitted an application on 10.12.2009 seeking permission for conversion, the same has not been done so far and that therefore, the School had approached this Court in W.P. (MD)No.59 of 2010, seeking for a direction to the Educational authorities to include the list of 21 male students studying in Standard X and to permit them to write the examinations held on March 2010. An interim direction has also been granted in the Writ Petition. A contention has also been made that pending consideration of the application for conversion, 21 male students, already permitted were permitted to write the examinations, in the last three academic years, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 respectively. 16.Though the District Educational Officer, Virudhunagar District, the 5th respondent herein, has admitted that male students admitted in Sivaram Girls High School, Mamasapuram, Srivilliputhur, Virudhunagar District, during the academic years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 were admitted and also permitted to write the public examinations, no explanation has been given, as to why they were granted permission by the Chief Educational Officer, Virudhunagar District, when students were admitted in 2006-07 and thus it could be seen that the Educational authorities have not objected to the admission of the male students from the academic year 2006-07 upto 2008-09 and also permitted the male students to take up the public examinations. One would naturally expect that there would not be any objection for admitting the male students, for the academic year 2009-10 also. However, perusal of the impugned order shows that the District Educational Officer, Virudhunagar, vide proceedings, dated 17.06.2010 has specifically instructed the School, not to admit any male student and also cautioned that if any admission https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 10 was made, the school would be responsible for the future consequences. Though, the Regional Deputy Director, Government Examinations, Madurai, by letter dated 15.11.2010, has stated that permission would not be granted to male students to take up the public examinations in March 2011, until the permission is granted by the Directorate of School Education, Chennai, the counter affidavit is totally silent with regard to the contention of the petitioner that proposals, which are submitted for conversion, as early as on 10.12.2009 is still pending consideration with the Directorate. It is not reasonable to keep the application pending for a long time and also restrain them from admitting the male students. 17. The reason for rejecting the request of the petitioner school, in the impugned order is dismissal of the writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.59 of 2010, which was admittedly field by the School, for permission for 21 students to take up the public examinations held on March 2010. Withdrawal of the writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.59 of 2010 filed for 21 male students for March 2010 examinations, and to include them for March 2010 examinations, cannot be a valid reason for not permitting 17 students of the year 2010-11 to take up March 2011 examinations. However, perusal of the impugned order shows that by order dated 17.06.2010, The District Educational Officer, has instructed the School that not to admit any male students. It could be seen from the materials on record that students have already been admitted in Standards IX and X in the previous years and that they have only continued their studies in the same school. In any event, when there is a specific instruction issued by the District Educational Officer, Virudhunagar, not to admit any students, the School ought not to have admitted the students, for Standard 10, for the academic year 2010-11. 18.Now realizing the mistake, the Secretary of Sivaram Girls High School, Mamsapuram, Srivilliputhur Taluk, Virudhunagar District, has tendered an unconditional apology in their additional affidavit, dated 27.07.2011. Non publication of their results would affect the educational career. Needless to say that the classes have already commenced for Standard XI in all the Schools, in the State. Considering the over all aspects of the cases, particularly, the admission of male students from 2006-09 by the Sivaram Girls High School, Mamsapuram, Srivilliputhur Taluk, Virudhunagar District, and the participation of the students in the public examination, without any objection for the earlier years upto 2008 and having regard to the fact that for the current academic year 2011-12, no male students has been admitted to Standard IX and all the X Standard students, who had undergone their studies in the above said School have already relieved, the students, who have taken up the examination should not be made to suffer. It is to be noted that permission has been accorded to the School to conduct Standards IX and X without granting aid and that therefore, they should have acted more diligently. 19.In the above said circumstances, there shall be a direction to the Director of Government examinations, Chennai and the Regional Deputy Director, Madurai, the respondents 2 and 4 in both the writ petitions, to publish the results, issue mark sheets to 17 boy students, who are all minors, who had written X Standard examinations on 28.03.2011, forthwith, so as to enable them to join Standard XI. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 11 20.The only question that remains to be considered is as to whether any costs has to be imposed for the conduct of the petitioner School in admitting 17 students, contrary to the directions issued by the the District Educational Officer, Virudhunagar. Considering the fact that the School had conducts Classes for IX and X standard without any grant (self finance), this Court is of the considered view that the School should not be saddled with heavy costs, for admitting the students, without proper recognition and at the same time, the School should also understand and perceive the agony of the students have been unnecessarily dragged on to this Court and prevented from joining the XI Standard, immediately after declaration of results of the public examinations, like other students. Considering the location of the school and the students, who hail from a poor background, this Court deems it fit to order payment of Rs.20,000/- (Rupees twenty thousand only) as costs, payable to 'Anbagam', Home for Mentally Retarded, situated at Race Course Road, K.Pudur, Madurai – 625 007, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The writ petitioner shall produce the receipt to the Registry by filing a memorandum within the stipulated period. The School educational authorities are directed to grant relaxation to the students, if required, for admission to STD X, as delay in publishing the results is not due to their fault. In the interest of the students, their admission to XI Standard should not be denied, unless there are any other bono fide reason. The time consumed in litigation should be excluded. 21.At this juncture, Mr.S.Chandrasekaran, learned Government Advocate fairly submitted that in the interest of students, the results will be published forthwith. 22.In the result, the writ petitions are disposed of with the above directions. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (Writs) /True copy/ Sub Assistant Registrar To 1.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai-6. 2.The Director of Government Examination, Directorate of School Examination, College Road, Chennai.-6. 3.The Chief Educational Officer, Virudhunagar District. 4.The Regional Deputy Director, Govt.Examinations, Office of the Regional Deputy Director, Madurai – 5. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 12 5.The District Educational Officer, Virudhunagar. 6. Anbagam Home for Mentally Retarded, Race Course Road, K.Pudur, Madurai-625 007. 7. The Section Officer, Writ Section, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai. (For watching the filing of payment-Received of