Disposed

S.Jesuraj v. the Joint Director of

Madras HC26 Jul 2017WA(MD)/1185/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ appeal was disposed of on agreed terms between the parties concerning the reinstatement and redeployment of a head mistress. The court directed respondent authorities to consider the respondent's request for redeployment in a needy school within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

Respondent No. 4 to be reinstated as Head Mistress and redeployed in a needy school within four weeks upon request; no costs awarded.

S.Jesuraj Vs the Joint Director of — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 26.07.2017 CORAM:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.SUNDRESH

¶4

AND THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR

¶5

W.A.(MD).No.1185 of 2014 & M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2014 & M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2015

¶6

S.Jesuraj :Petitioner/Petitioner/Appellant

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The Joint Director of Tamil Nadu Elementary Education (Aided School) O/o.Tamil Nadu Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai-600 006.

¶9

The District Elementary Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli.

¶10

The Assistant Elementary Education Officer, Kalakad, Tirunelveli District : Respondents 1 to 3/Respondents 1 to 3/ Respondents 1 to 3

¶11

4.Mrs.Unacie Grana : 4^th Respondent/4^th Respondent/4^th Respondent

¶12

5.Mrs.Tamilselvi Pushparani Head Mistress U.A.S.S.Elementary School, Inam Thiruvaranganeri Taluk, Eruvadi, Nanguneri Taluk, Tirunelveli District.

¶13

6.R.Venkateswari Secondary Grade Teacher U.A.S.S.Elementary School Inam Thiruvaranganeri Taluk, Eruvadi, Nangunerit Taluk, https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Tirunelveli District. : Respondents 5 & 6/Respondents 5 &6/ Respondents 5 & 6

¶14

¶15

PRAYER:Writ Appeal is filed under Clause 15 of Letters patent Act against the order dated 11.09.2014 made in M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2014 in W.P.No.10780 of 2014.

¶16

Prayer in MP(MD). 1/ 2014 in WP(MD).10780/2014 :

¶17

To grant interim stay of the operation of the impugned order of the 1st respondent dated 25.06.2014 vide proceedings ref. in Na.Ka.No. 11783/G1/2012 pending disposal of the above WP.

¶18

Prayer in WP(MD). 10780/ 2014 :

¶19

Writ Petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court To issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records relating to the proceedings of first respondent in Na.Ka.No. 11783/G1/2012 dated 25.06.2014 and quash the same and pass such further or other orders as this Honourable Court may deem fit .

¶20

For Appellant : Mr.S.Sivathilakar

¶21

For Respondents : Mr.VR.Shanmuganathan for R1 to R3

¶22

Special Government Pleader Mr.M.Ajmal Khan for R4 Senior Counsel for M/s.Ajmal Associates Mr.C.Kishore for R5 and R6

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

[Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH,J ]

¶25

After making submissions on merits, the learned counsel for the appellant would submit that the following order may be passed as agreed by the parties.

¶26

The respondent No.4 would be reinstated as Head Mistress by the appellant.

¶27

The respondent No.4, within one week from the date of reinstatement, would make a request to the authorities concerned seeking redeployment in some other school.

¶28

The authorities concerned shall consider the said request positively and redeploy the respondent No.4 notwithstanding that she is not the senior most teacher with the appellant.

¶29

Necessary orders as indicated above will have to be passed by the concerned authorities within a period of four weeks from the date of such https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ request being made by the respondent No.4.

¶30

Redeployment of the respondent No.4 will

¶31

¶32

have to be made to a needy school.

¶33

Respondent No.6 would work as Secondary Grade Teacher till the respondent No.4 is redeployed.

¶34

The writ appeal stands disposed of accordingly, leaving it

¶35

all issues of facts and law open. This order is passed only on the peculiar facts of the case and also in the interest of the institution. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

Assistant Registrar(T&P)

¶38

/True copy/

¶39

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶40

¶41

The Joint Director of Tamil Nadu Elementary Education (Aided School)

¶42

College Road,

¶43

Chennai-600 006.

¶44

The District Elementary Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District,

¶45

Tirunelveli.

¶46

3.The Assistant Elementary Education Officer, Kalakad,

¶47

Tirunelveli District

¶48

+1 cc to M/S.Ajmal Associates , Advocate in SR.No. 68049 +1 cc to Mr.S.Sivathilakar , Advocate in SR.No. 67775

¶49

+1 cc to The Special Government Pleader in SR.No.68692

¶50

jikr

¶51

AE/SKN RSK/SAR2/31.07.2017/3P/7C

¶52

ORDER MADE IN W.A.(MD).No.1185 of 2014 & M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2014 & M.P.(MD).No.1 of 2015 26.07.2017

¶53

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

S.Jesuraj v. the Joint Director of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Jesuraj v. the Joint Director of

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kamalakannan Vs Gomathi

P.Arimutharasu Vs the Superintending Engineer

K.a.Jeevan Kumar @ Jeevanlal, Vs the District Collector

Lakshmi Prabha, Vs the District Collector

National Council of Science Vs S. Ramasamy

L.Praveen Kumar Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer