High Court · 2025

W.P.No.12059 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED : 29.04.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE N.MALAW.P.No.12059 of 2025and WMP.Nos.13627 & 13628 of 2025The Correspondent Little Pumpkin Play School No.43, 6th Cross street, 2nd main road,EVP Santhosh Nagar, Ramapuram, Chennai. ... Petitioner Vs1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Department of School Education, Fort.St.George, Chennai 600 006.2. The Director of Private Schools, Directorate of School Education College Road, Chennai 600 006.3. The Chief Educational Officer, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.1/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12059 of 20254. The District Educational Officer Private Schools, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. .... Respondents Prayer: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order issued by the 4th respondent District Educational Officer in Na.Ka.No.997/A4/2025 dated 03.03.2025 withdrawing recognition of the petitioner school and to quash the same. For Petitioner: Mr.P.Godson Swaminathan for Isaac ChambersFor Respondents : Mr.L.S.M.Hassan Fazil Additional Govt. Pleader for R1 to R4 Mr.V.R.Appaswamee for R5 O R D E RThis writ petition is filed for a writ of certiorari to call for the records relating to the impugned order issued by the 4th respondent dated 03.03.2025, withdrawing recognition of the petitioner school and to quash the same.2. The petitioner school was established in the year 2013 and was 2/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12059 of 2025granted recognition by the 4th respondent on 12.09.2017, for the period 16.06.2015 to 15.06.2018. Thereafter recognition was extended periodically by the 4th respondent. The 4th respondent on 25.07.2024, granted recognition for the period from 16.06.2015 to 15.06.2018. 3. The petitioner school is a play school offering education up to UKG. In the year 2021, one Mr.M.Loganathan purchased the land with a building opposite to the petitioner's play school. The said Loganathan started raising unwanted issues in relation to the petitioner's play school, which prompted the 4th respondent to issue a show cause notice on 04.09.2024, to the petitioner school for violation of Rule 38 and Rule 8 (2) (a) and (b) of Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulations) Rules 2023. In the show cause notice reference was made to the order of this Court in W.P.No.12865 of 2024, wherein directions were issued to the authorities to take action against the school, if it was functioning without proper recognition/permission. The petitioner school submitted its explanation on 20.09.2024, to the show cause notice denying any violation of the rules. 3/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12059 of 20254. Thereafter, the 4th respondent issued a communication dated 26.02.2025 styled as reminder to the show cause notices, stating that the explanation to the show cause notices dated 04.09.2024 & 12.12.2024 should reach within 24 hours. Thereafter the 4th respondent passed the impugned order on 03.03.2025 withdrawing recognition by invoking Section 10 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2018 and Rules 11 and 38 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Rules, 2023. In the impugned order the 4th respondent observed that the school did not reply to the show cause notices in time. The petitioner states that out of three notices referred to in the impugned order, explanation was sent to the first and the last notices. The petitioner states that the second notice was not even served on the petitioner. According to the petitioner explanation dated 27.02.2025, was submitted to the last notice dated 26.02.2025. As the impugned order was passed without considering the petitioner's explanations and in violation of the injunction order passed on 18.09.2024 in W.P.No.22258 of 2024 by the Division Bench of this Court, the petitioner filed the above writ petition for the aforesaid relief. 4/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12059 of 20255. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6. The petitioner submits that although the respondents stated that 3 show cause notices dated 04.09.2024, 12.12.2024 and 26.02.2025 were issued to him, he, in fact received only 2 and the notice dated 12.12.2024 was never served upon him. The petitioner further states that he submitted his explanation to the first show cause notice dated 04.09.2024, on 20.09.2024. Subsequently, a reminder was issued on 26.02.2025 and the petitioner furnished his explanation thereto on 27.02.2025. Assuming without admitting that the petitioner had not replied to the show cause notices dated 04.09.2024 and 12.12.2024, the issuance of the reminder dated 26.02.2025, and the petitioner's reply dated 27.02.2025, clearly indicate that an explanation was offered and ought to have been considered. From the typed set of papers filed by the petitioner, it is evident that replies to the notices dated 04.09.2024 & 26.02.2025 were indeed submitted within the stipulated time. However, the 4th respondent, while passing the impugned order dated 03.03.2025, 5/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12059 of 2025erroneously recorded that no explanation was submitted within the stipulated time. In my view the such observation is contrary to the materials available on record. 7. Even in the references made in the impugned order, there is no mention of the replies submitted by the petitioner on 20.09.2024 and 27.02.2025. It appears that even without looking into the aforesaid replies which were filed in time, the 4th respondent for the sake of rejecting the explanation, merely stated that the replies were received beyond the time stipulated in the show cause notices. 8. In the light of the aforementioned facts, the non-consideration of the petitioner's replies to the first and the last show cause notices coupled with the absence of any cogent explanation for such non-consideration, renders the impugned order illegal and arbitrary. Furthermore, the impugned order is vitiated by the twin defects of being non-speaking in nature and reflecting total non application of mind. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted to the first 6/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12059 of 2025respondent for fresh consideration. The petitioner is permitted to submit a fresh representation in response to the show cause notice dated 26.02.2025, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Upon receipt of such representation, the 4th respondent shall afford an opportunity of personal hearing, consider the representation on its own merits, and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law, within a period of eight weeks thereafter.9. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is also closed. 29-04-2025dpqIndex: Yes/NoSpeaking order / Non speaking orderTo1. The State of Tamil Nadu Rep.by its Principal Secretary, Department of School Education, Fort.St.George, Chennai 600 006.7/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12059 of 20252. The Director of Private Schools, Directorate of School Education College Road, Chennai 600 006.3. The Chief Educational Officer, Egmore, Chennai 600 008.4. The District Educational Officer Private Schools, Egmore, Chennai 600 008. N. MALA, J.dpqW.P.No.12059 of 2025and WMP.Nos.13627 & 13628 of 20258/9 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.No.12059 of 202529.04.20259/9