Madras High Court
The Principal vs Minor E.Ganesh on 18 February, 2015
Bench: S.Tamilvanan, V.S.Ravi
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 18.02.2015
Coram
THE HONOURABLE Dr.JUSTICE S.TAMILVANAN
and
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE V.S.RAVI
Writ Appeal (MD) Nos.1534 of 2014
and 1535 of 2014
and
M.P.(MD)Nos.1 of 2014 in W.A.(MD)No.1534 of 2014
and
2 of 2014 in W.A.(MD)No.1535 of 2014
W.A.(MD)No.1534 of 2015:
The Principal,
S.B.K.Thiyagarajan Memorial Matriculation School,
5-13-5A, Sngarathoppu 1st Street,
Aruppukottai-626 101,
Virudhunagar District. ... Appellant/ Respondent-3
vs.
1.Minor E.Ganesh, S/o.P.Elampooranan
2.Minor P.E.Chomeshvar, S/o.P.Elampooranan
(Minors Respondents 1 and 2 are represented by their Mother
R.S.Usharani) ... Respondents 1&2/ Petitioners
3.The District Collector,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar.
4.Inspector of Matriculation Schools,
Subbiah Nadar Higher Secondary
School Campus, Ramamoorthy Road,
Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents 3&4/ Respondents 1& 2
W.A.(MD)No.1535 of 2015:
The Secretary,
S.B.K.Thiyagarajan Memorial Matriculation School,
5-13-5A, Sngarathoppu 1st Street,
Aruppukottai-626 101,
Virudhunagar District. ... Appellant/
Respondent-6
vs.
1.R.S.Usha Rani ... 1st Respondent/
Petitioner
2.The Secretary to Government,
School Education Department,
St.George Fort,Chennai-9.
3.The Director of Matriculation Schools,
DPI Campus, Chennai.
4.The District Collector,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar.
5.Inspector of Matriculation Schools,
Subbiah Nadar Higher Secondary
School Campus, Ramamoorthy Road,
Virudhunagar District.
6.The Principal,
S.B.K.Thiyagarajan Memorial Matriculation School,
5-13-5A, Sngarathoppu 1st Street,
Aruppukottai-626 101,
Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents 2 to 6/
Respondents 1 to 5
W.A.(MD)No.1534/2014:
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order
of the learned Single Judge, dated 22.09.2014, made in W.P.(MD)No.17017 of
2013.
W.A.(MD)No.1535/2014:
Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of Letters Patent, against the order
of the learned Single Judge, dated 22.09.2014, made in W.P.(MD)No.9924 of
2014.
!For Appellant : Mr.A.V.Arun
in both the WAs
^For Respondents-1&2 : Mr.Pethu Rajesh
in WA 1534/2014 &
Respondent-1 in
WA 1535/2014
For Respondent-3&4 : Mr.C.Selvaraj,
in WA 1534/2014 & Spl.Govt.Pleader.
Respondents 2 to 5
in WA 1535/2014
:JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by S.TAMILVANAN,J) Challenging the order, dated 22.09.2014, passed in W.P.(MD)No.17017 of 2013, the writ appeal in W.A.(MD)No.1534 of 2014 has been filed by the appellant, who was the 3rd respondent in the writ petition. Similarly, W.A.(MD)No.1535 of 2014 is filed challenging the order, dated 22.09.2014, passed in W.P.(MD)No.9924 of 2013, by the appellant, who was the 6th respondent in the writ petition.
2.Heard Mr.A.V.Arun, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2, the students and the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents.
3.The writ petition in W.P.(MD)No.9924 of 2014 was filed by R.S.Usha Rani, seeking an order in the nature of writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 4 therein, namely the Secretary to Government, School Education Department, the Director of Matriculation Schools, The District Collector, Virudhunagar District and the Inspector of Matriculation Schools, Virudhunagar District, to take action against respondents 5 and 6 therein, namely The Principal and Secretary, respectively of S.B.K.Thiyagarajan Memorial Matriculation School, Aruppukkottai, and their institution, based on her representation, dated 15.06.2014, and to ensure the continuity of the studies of the petitioner's children E.Ganesh and P.E.Chomeshvar in the 6th respondent's School and also to direct the respondents 1 to 6 to pay adequate compensation for the loss of studies to the petitioner's children for the year 2013 and 2014.
4.W.P.(MD)No.17017 of 2013 was filed by the said minor students, through their mother R.S.Usha Rani, seeking an order in the nature of writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1 and 2 therein to take necessary action against the 3rd respondent, namely the Principal of of S.B.K.Thiyagarajan Memorial Matriculation School, Aruppukkottai, and to save and secure the right to education of the petitioners, by admitting them into the school and to continue their studies, by considering the representation of the petitioner's mother dated 11.09.2013.
5.The learned Single Judge, after hearing the parties, passed the following common order in both the writ petitions:
"21.In the light of the above discussion, the respondent management shall admit the petitioner's children namely E.Ganesh and P.E.Chomeshvar in 6th and 2nd standards, respectively, in their institution, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. After admitting the children, t is open to the management to pursue their representation given to the Director of Matriculation Schools, dated 01.10.2013, which shall be considered in accordance with law. Direction is issued to admit the children in standards 6th and 2nd respectively since the children have not been attending school since July, 2013. The allegations made by the petitioner and the respondent management against each other has not been adjudicated and is left open to be agitated before the appropriate forum."
6.Mr.A.V.Arun, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, submitted that the learned Single Judge issued direction to admit the respondents 1 and 2, children aged about 11 years and 7 years, respectively, in the school run by the appellants herein, on the ground that 'Right to Education' is a fundamental right, without considering the reasonable restrictions and the misconduct of the mother of the students. Learned counsel also submitted that the appellant Management is running nearly four schools and maintaining proper standard in imparting education and discipline to the students. However, according to the learned counsel, the conduct of the mother of the students, respondents 1 and 2 herein, has adversely affected the atmosphere and the reputation of the educational institution and that is the reason why the Management of the School thought it proper not to admit the respondents 1 and 2 in the appellant school, apart from the reason that they have not paid the school fees payable towards their admission.
8.Per contra, Mr.Pethu Rajesh, learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2 herein submits that the parents of the respondents 1 and 2 were ready and willing to pay the prescribed school fees, however, the same was not received by the school management and on the said circumstances, the writ petitions came to be filed and considering the facts and circumstances, the learned Single Judge passed the order directing the appellants herein to admit the respondents 1 and 2 in standards 6th and 2nd, respectively, in the school.
7.In the order passed by the learned Single Judge, it is specifically stated as follows:
"20.... Therefore, the management is bound to comply with the direction issued by the Inspector of Matriculation Schools, dated 22.08.2013, which is to the following effect:
" ghh;it (2) y; fz;l jA;fs; mYtyf fojj;jpy; bjhptpf;fg;gl;l fhuzA;fs; Ma;t[ bra;ag;gl;lJ. RTI Act, 2009 kw;Wk; jkpH;ehL tpjp 2011d;;go xU khztd; jhd; tpUk;g[k; gs;spapy; tpUk;g[k tiu gof;f mDkjp mspf;fg;gl;Ls;sJ. vdBt, RTI Act gphpt[ 2009 kw;Wk; jkpH;ehL tpjp 2011d;go murhizfis kjpj;J rk;ge;jg;gl;l gp.n.BrhBk!;th; 2k; tFg;g[ kw;Wk; n.fBz&; 6k; tFg;g[ Mfpa nUtiua[k; cldoahfg; gs;spapy; Brh;j;jpl njd; Kyk; kPz;Lk; Mizaplg;gLfpwJ.
khzth;fs; eyd; fUjp gs;sp Kjy;th;,> eph;thfk; kw;Wk; bgw;Bwhh; jA;;fSf;fpilBa Bkhjy; Bghf;fpid iftpl Btz;Lk; vdt[k; njd; Kyk; mwpt[Wj;jg;gLfpwJ. """
8.It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant that the School Management is ready to admit both the students in some other school run by the appellant and in the affidavit filed on behalf of the appellant, it is stated that the following schools are run by Saiva Bhanu Kshtriya Educational Agency, Aruppukkottai.
1.SBK Junior Nursery School
2.SBK Elementary School
3.SBK Thiyagarajan Memorial Matriculation School
4.SBK Boys Higher Secondary School
5.S.B.K.Girls Higher Secondary School wherein the number of students studying in those schools are also specifically stated.
9.However, the learned counsel appearing for the respondents 1 and 2/students, relying on the counter statement, submitted that some of the schools run by the appellant are not having all the facilities and English Medium or Computer Education are not available in the school where the appellant has proposed for admission of the respondents 1 and 2 and the international school is collecting exorbitant fees which could not be paid by the students. The learned counsel submits further that the students are doing 6th and 2nd standards, respectively, hence if they are admitted in some other school, the new atmosphere will certainly affect their education.
10.Having considered the averments made in the affidavit, counter affidavit and the rejoinder filed on behalf of the appellant and the respondents 1 and 2/students, we are of the considered view that there is no justification or reasonable grounds available to admit the students in some other school by the appellant against the order passed by the learned Single Judge. The allegation of the appellant school management is only against the parents of the students, who are respondents 1 and 2 herein. If the behaviour of the parents of respondents 1 and 2 are not conducive and there is any real apprehension that the same would affect the cordial atmosphere and reputation of the school, the appellants would be at liberty to proceed against them, according to law and equally, it is applicable to the parents in defending their case. However, based on the allegation raised against the parents, respondents 1 and 2, who are students studying 6th and 2nd standards, cannot be shifted to some other school run by the appellant/school management. Hence, we are also of the considered view that during the middle of the academic year, before completing the course, if the students are transferred or shifted to any other school, that would affect their education due to the new atmosphere. On the said circumstances, we could find no error or infirmity in the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge and accordingly the writ appeals are liable to be dismissed. However, it is open to the parties to agitate before the appropriate forum, if there is any other legal grievance available to either party.
11.Mr.A.V.Arun, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, on the instructions received from the appellants, fairly submitted that the respondents 1 and 2 may approach the Appellants/ School Management, along with their parents or any other person, within a time frame that may be fixed by this Court, and make payment towards admission of the children and accordingly the appellant School would admit them, as directed by the learned Single Judge.
12.Therefore, we make it clear that the respondents 1 and 2, either with their parents or any other person, shall approach the appellant/school management, either on 20th February, 2015 or any other working day within 10 days from today, for their admission in the school. On such appearance, the respondents 1 and 2 shall be admitted by the appellant/school management, on payment of necessary fees, without causing delay.
13.With the above observation, both the writ appeals are dismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
Index:yes/no (S.T.,J) (V.S.R.,J)
Internet:yes/no. 18.02.2015
gb
Note to Office:
Issue order copy on
19.02.2015.
To:
1.The Secretary to Government,
School Education Department,
St.George Fort,Chennai-9.
2.The Director of Matriculation Schools,
DPI Campus, Chennai.
3.The District Collector,
Virudhunagar District,
Virudhunagar.
4.Inspector of Matriculation Schools,
Subbiah Nadar Higher Secondary
School Campus, Ramamoorthy Road,
Virudhunagar District.
S.TAMILVANAN,J
and
V.S.RAVI,J
gb
Judgment in
W.A.(MD)Nos.1534 and
1535 of 2014 and
Connected Mps.
Dated:18.02.2015