High Court · 2025

W.P.No.6296 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 10.10.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYANW.P.No. 6296 of 2025 and WMP.No.6930 of 2025R.Sagayanathan ... PetitionerVs.1.The Director of Elementary Education,DPI Campus,College ROAD, CHENNAI-062.THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION,(AIDED SCHOOLS), DPI CAMPUS, COLLEGE ROAD, CHENNAI-063.THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER(ELEMENTARY),THIRUVARUR, THIRUVARUR DISTRICT4.THE BLOCK EDUCATIONAL OFFICER-II,NANNILAM, THIRUVARUR DISTRICT5.G.VAIDYANATHAN ... Respondents1/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6296 of 2025PRAYER: Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order dated 10.12.2024 made in Na.Ka.No.023690/H4/2024 passed by the 2nd respondent, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 3 and 4 to disburse the staff and maintenance grants aid of the K.M.Gurusamy Pillai Government Aided Middle school, Thirukottaram to the school committee recognized by the 3rd respondent on 23.05.2023 vide Proceedings made in Na.Ka.No.1251/A4/2023.For Petitioner: Mr.N.Manoharan for Mr.R.T.VishnuFor RespondentsFor R1 to 4 : Mr.S.Prabhakaran, Government AdvocateO R D E R2/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6296 of 2025 This writ petition has been filed challenging the order passed by the second respondent dated 10.12.2024. 2.The petitioner is the Secretary of the School i.e. KM Gurusamy Pillai Government Aided Middle School (hereinafter called as ‘the school’). It was established in the year 1936 by KM Gurusamy Pillai and his brother. The subject school is a Government Aided Middle School. After demise of the said KM Gurusamy Pillai, his elder son KMG Malaiperumal was managing the School as Secretary. Thereafter, the petitioner was appointed as Secretary and the same was recognised by the third respondent. The same was renewed from time to time. While being so, the petitioner’s wife and the petitioner formed KMG Educational and Charitable Trust for administration of the school. The trust deed was duly registered vide document No.299 of 2013 dated 03.06.2013. The trust is the educational agency formed as per Section 12 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2019. The petitioner was appointed as 3/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6296 of 2025Secretary of the school committee and the same was duly recognised by the third respondent and the same was renewed till 23.02.2026. In the meanwhile, the petitioner attained age of superannuation and he retired from the post of Headmaster on 31.05.2023. But the petitioner still continues as Secretary of the School Committee. While being so, the third respondent passed order on 06.07.2023 by misconstruing the petitioner’s retirement from the post of Headmaster and directed direct payment of grants. It was challenged before this Court in WP.No.31546 of 2023. The fifth respondent also filed WP.No.34338 of 2023 claiming himself as Secretary of the school. This Court by common order dated 18.09.2024 directed the Joint Director, Aided Schools (Elementary) DPI Campus, Chennai to pass orders in accordance with law to decide the school committee and also its Secretary after giving notice to all the parties. As directed by this Court, the second respondent conducted enquiry. The fifth respondent produced documents in the name of the petitioner as if the petitioner resigned from his Secretaryship. Therefore, the second 4/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6296 of 2025respondent passed order dated 10.12.2024 directing the third respondent to approve the change in the educational agency as per Rules 37(1) of the Tamilnadu Private Schools (Regulation) Rules, 2023 (hereinafter called as ‘the Rules’).3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the power to nominate and change the Secretary of the school committee is vested with the educational agency subject to the approval of the third respondent under Section 14(4) of the Tamilnadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2019 (hereinafter called as ‘the Act’) and Rule 25 (1) & (2) of the Rules. The third respondent can remove the Secretary only if the school agency has failed to comply with the directions made under Rule 25(4). The educational agency has nominated the petitioner as the Secretary as per the powers under Section 14(4) of the Act and Rule 25 of the Rules. Further, the third respondent without giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, passed order on 06.07.2023 and it is clear 5/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6296 of 2025violation of Rules 25(5) of the Rules. If there were lapses in the administration, the third respondent ought to have proceeded to appoint Special Officer as contemplated under Section 31(1) of the Act without ordering direct payment of grants. 4.He further submitted that the fifth respondent appeared before the second respondent and produced resignation letter of the petitioner from Secretaryship of the school committee. Further, the fifth respondent also formed trust namely KM Gurusamy Pillai Educational and Charitable Trust and attempted to transfer the educational agency to its name. 5.On instruction, the learned Government Advocate appearing for respondents 1 to 4 submitted that only on the basis of the documents produced by the fifth respondent, the second respondent passed order and if at all the petitioner was not given opportunity, to that limited 6/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6296 of 2025extent, the matter may be remanded back to the second respondent for passing fresh order.6.Though notice was served on the fifth respondent and his name has been printed in the cause list, no one appeared on behalf of him before this Court either in person or through pleader.7.On perusal of records, it is found that a new trust has been formed by the fifth respondent namely KM Gurusamy Pillai Educational and Charitable Trust, which is an educational agency of the subject school. It is completely different one. As per Section 13(1)(b) of the Act, transfer of management would be considered by the second respondent on an application made jointly by both the trusts in Form V. For the transfer of the management of the subject school, the second respondent is the competent authority to pass orders as per Rule 37(2) of the Rules and Annexure I-A. But no joint application has been made to the second 7/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6296 of 2025respondent. Therefore, the second respondent ought not to have passed the impugned order. If at all there is any dispute with regard to the constitution of an educational agency or school committee, such dispute can be decided only by civil court as contemplated under Section 56 of the Act. However, the second respondent passed the impugned order. 8.In view of the above, the impugned order cannot be sustained and the same is liable to be set aside. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the second respondent dated 10.12.2024 is set aside. The third and fourth respondents are directed to disburse the grants aid of the K.M.Gurusamy Pillai Government Aided Middle school, Thirukottaram directly to the school committee as recognized by the third respondent.9.With the above direction, this writ petition is allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. There shall be 8/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6296 of 2025no order as to costs. 10.10.2025Neutral citation: Yes/No Index: Yes/NoSpeaking/Non-speaking orderlokTo1.The Director of Elementary Education,DPI Campus,College ROAD, CHENNAI-062.THE JOINT DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION,(AIDED SCHOOLS), DPI CAMPUS, COLLEGE ROAD, CHENNAI-063.THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER(ELEMENTARY),THIRUVARUR, THIRUVARUR DISTRICT4.THE BLOCK EDUCATIONAL OFFICER-II,NANNILAM, THIRUVARUR DISTRICTG.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.lok9/10 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.6296 of 2025W.P.No.6296 of 202510.10.202510/10