1 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED 15.12.2011 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.RAJA W.P(MD)No.14326 of 2011 Hindu Nadar Primary school, represented by its Secretary, Ayyasamy, S/o. Periyasamy, Ettaiyapuram, Pudur, Tuticorin District. ..Petitioner Vs 1. The District Elementary Educational officer, Tuticorin District. 2. The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Tuticorin District. ..Respondents. Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to pass orders on the proposal given to the first respondent, dated 20.02.2010 which was forwarded by the second respondent for approval on merits and in accordance with law, within a time stipulated by this Court. For Petitioner :M/s.F.Deepak For Respondents :MrS.Bharathi Government Advocate ORDER The Petitioner/Hindu Nadar Primary School, represented by its Secretary, Ettaiyapuram, Pudur, Tuticorin District has filed the present Writ petition seeking for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the first respondent to pass orders on the proposal given to the first respondent, dated 20.02.2010 which was forwarded by the second respondent for approval, on merits and in accordance with law, within a time stipulated by this Court. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 2 2. One of the Teachers working in the petitioner's school by name, Mr.Baskar has suffered departmental proceedings which ultimately ended in submission of a final report and the disciplinary authority on considering the enquiry report came to the conclusion that the said Teacher Mr.Baskar has rendered himself unbecoming of a Teacher to continue in the petitioner's school. As a result, the disciplinary authority made a proposal to remove the said Teacher from the service of the petitioner/school. Since Section 22 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools Regulation Act contemplates prior approval from the first respondent through the second respondent before passing of any order of removal, termination or reversion, the petitioner/School Management has forwarded the proposal for the concurrence of the removal of the said Teacher. Though the said proposal has been forwarded through second respondent to the first respondent, the first respondent till date has not considered the proposal. As a result, the petitioner has come to this Court. 3. Mrs.S.Bharathi, learned Government Advocate takes notice on behalf of the respondents and submits that since the prayer sought for is limited one, sufficient time may be granted for disposal of the appeal. 4. Recording the said submission, this Court without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, directs the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the proposal given by the petitioner, dated 20.02.2010,through second respondent, on merits and in accordance with law, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order 5. With the above direction, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs. Sd/- Assistant Registrar /True Copy/ Sub-Assistant Registrar To 1. The District Elementary Educational officer, Tuticorin District. 2.The Assistant Elementary Educational Officer, Tuticorin District. +One cc to Mr.F.Deepak, Advocate, SR.No.44035 +One Cc to The Spl Govt. Pleader, SR.No.44041 vsn rl/5 c- 28.12.2011 W.P(MD)No.14326 OF 2011 15.12.2011 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/