Dismissed

A.Thirumal, v. the Secretary

Madras HC3 Jan 2017WP/12984/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the Parents Association seeking directions to stop construction at a new location for a government high school. The court noted construction had commenced and no challenge was made in the past three years.

What did the court decide?

No costs. No directions for stopping school construction or disposing of representations.

A.Thirumal, Vs the Secretary — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 03.01.2017

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE D. KRISHNAKUMAR

¶5

W.P. No. 12984 of 2013

¶6

A. Thirumal ..Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Secretary
Government of Tamil Nadu
Education Department
Fort St. Geroge
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The District Collector
Vellore District
Vellore.
3. The District Principal Secretary
to Educational Officer
District Principal Education Office
Vellore District
Vellore
4. The District Revenue Officer
Vellore District
Vellore.
5. The Tahsildar
Walaja Taluk
Vellore District .. Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of
Mandamus, directing the respondents to dispose of the
petitioner's representation dated 05.04.2013 regarding stopping
of running the newly constructed school building and function
the school in the same place and pass further orders.
For Petitioner : Mr. R. Ramesh
For Respondents : Mr. S. Diwakar,
Spl. Govt. Pleader
O R D E R

¶7

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

¶8

The petitioner has filed the present writ petition, seeking to direct the respondents to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 05.04.2013 with regard to stoppage of functioning of the school in the newly constructed school building, in the same place.

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is the President of Baghaveli Government High School Parents Welfare Association. The Baghaveli High School is situated in the middle of the village and about 3 kms. away from the school, a new building is constructed. It is stated that the said locality is a forest area and it is unsafe for the students, particularly for girls. Some of the villagers, have agreed to provide a house as an alternative place. Learned counsel further submitted that the petitioner Association as well as the villagers are willing to provide vacant land and extend financial help, to run the school in a safe environment. Inspite of the repeated approaches, the respondents continued the construction at the said place. Therefore, a representation dated 05.04.2013 was made to the respondents. Since, no action has been taken on the representation, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition.

¶10

Learned Special Government Pleader representing the respondents, based on the counter filed by the 3^rd respondent, submitted that the Panchayat Union Middle School, Baghaveli was upgraded as High School in the year 2006 with 169 students and so additional class rooms were required for Std. IX and X. Hence, as per the direction of Government, under the scheme of Nabbard Bank, in the year 2011 the said location was chosen for constructing a new building. According to the 3^rd respondent, all the teachers and students are willing to work in the new constructed building and only the petitioner Association objects for running the school in the newly constructed building. The Government have sanctioned an estimated cost of Rs.77 lakhs towards the same. Therefore, learned Special Government Pleader submitted that on the above grounds, the representation of the petitioner could not be considered and the writ petition is liable to be dismissed.

¶11

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Special Government Pleader representing the respondents. Perused the material available on records.

¶12

Following the Government order, in G.O. Ms. No. 276 School Education (X1) Department dated 21.09.2010, an administrative order has been passed for construction of the building. Even according to the petitioner, the construction has commenced in the newly allotted place. It is seen that the petitioner has not challenged any further proceedings, for the

¶13

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

¶14

past three years. Therefore, at this stage, the prayer of the petitioner cannot be considered.

¶15

In view of the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.

¶16

avr
To
1. The Secretary
Government of Tamil Nadu
Education Department
Fort St. Geroge
Chennai – 600 009.
2. The District Collector
Vellore District
Vellore.
3. The District Principal Secretary
to Educational Officer
District Principal Education Officer
Vellore District
Vellore
4. The District Revenue Officer
Vellore District
Vellore.
5. The Tahsildar
Walaja Taluk
Vellore District
+1cc to Mr.R.Ramesh,Sr.373
+1cc to Government Pleader sr.798
W.P. No. 12984 of 2013
skv(co)
ss(6/3/2017)

¶17

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

A.Thirumal, v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.Thirumal, v. the Secretary

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Rangasamy, President, Vs the District Collector

A.Anbalagan Vs Tamilnadu State Transport

M.Veerappan Vs the Director of Town

P.Guruswamy Vs the District Collector

Smt.M.Tamilselvi, Vs the Union of India

K.Babu Nawaz Khan, Vs the Chief Executive Officer