Dismissed

Gandhi Kalvi Nilayam High v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC3 Feb 2017WP/725/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the rejection of a school's application for renewal of recognition due to non-compliance with the mandatory requirement of having RCC roofs instead of Mangalore tiling. The Court directed the school to replace the roofing by 31.12.2017 regardless of pending government funds.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner school directed to replace Mangalore tiled roofing with RCC roofing on or before 31.12.2017; writ petition disposed of.

Gandhi Kalvi Nilayam High Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 03.02.2017

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.RAJENDRAN

¶6

Writ Petition No. 725 of 2017

¶7

and

¶8

W.M.P. No.765 of 2017

¶9

Gandhi Kalvi Nilayam High School represented by its Secretary Thenkalpalayam - 636 301 Namakkal District .. Petitioner

¶10

Versus

¶11

The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary to Government Education Department Fort St. George

¶12

Chennai - 600 009

¶13

The Joint Director of School Education (Secondary Education D.P.I. Compound, College Road Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 006

¶14

The Chief Educational Officer Namakkal District Namakkal

¶15

The District Educational Officer Namakkal

¶16

.. Respondents

¶17

Petition filed under Article 226 of The Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the entire records connected with the impugned order passed by the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.9677/Aa.2/2016 dated 16.12.2016, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to pass orders of renewal of recognition from 01.06.2016 to 31.05.2019.

¶18

For Petitioner : Mr. S.N. Ravichandran For Respondents : Mr. S. Rajeswaran Special Government Pleader

¶19

¶20

ORDER

¶21

The petitioner school has come come forward with this writ petition challenging the proceedings dated 16.12.2016 of the third respondent, in and by which, the application submitted by the petitioner for renewal of recognition was returned by the third respondent with a direction to the fourth respondent to send necessary proposal after the petitioner rectified all the defects pointed out therein.

¶22

Earlier, when the writ petition was taken up for hearing on 10.01.2017, it was contended on behalf of the petitioner that even though the petitioner school submitted the application for renewal of recognition on 27.05.2016 by furnishing all the necessary particulars, it was returned by the third respondent on the ground that the petitioner school has failed to lay RCC roofs and only the Mangalore tiled roofing is in existence. Since it is one of the mandatory requirements to be fulfilled by the petitioner, this Court directed the petitioner to comply with the said requirement within a time frame and to file an affidavit to that effect. Accordingly, when the writ petition is taken up for hearing today, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted an affidavit filed by the Secretary of the petitioner school undertaking to replace the mangalore tiled roofing with RCC roofing within a period of one year from the date of receipt of the building grant from the Government. In Para-8 of the affidavit, it is stated as follows:-

¶23

"8. I humbly submit that the school is fully aided by the Government. Further, the school made representations to the Government and the respondents herein requesting for building funds and the school is waiting for the sanctioning of the building grant from the Government. Under these circumstances, I hereby undertake to alter the Mangalore tile roofing as RCC roofs in the school in a phased manner within a period of one year from the receipt of the building grants from the Government."

¶24

¶25

This Court is not inclined to accept such a plea made by the petitioner and this Court is only inclined to grant time of one year from 01.02.2017 till 31.12.2017 to enable the petitioner to replace the mangalore tiled roofing with RCC roofing in their school. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to comply with the condition relating to replacing the mangalore tiled roofing with RCC roofing on or before 31.12.2017. It is made clear that it is not open to the petitioner to plead that they have not received the grant from the Government or any other plea relating to financial constraints and the petitioner has to replace the mangalore tiled roofing with RCC roofing on or before 31.12.2017 failing which it is open to the respondents to proceed further against the petitoner school in accordance with law.

¶26

With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

¶27

Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

03.02.2017

rsh

Index : Yes / No

Internet : Yes / No

The State of Tamil Nadu rep. by its Secretary to Government Education Department Fort St. George Chennai - 600 009

¶34

The Joint Director of School Education (Secondary Education D.P.I. Compound, College Road Nungambakkam, Chennai - 600 006

B. RAJENDRAN, J

rsh

The Chief Educational Officer Namakkal District Namakkal

¶39

The District Educational Officer Namakkal

¶40

WP No. 725 of 2017

¶41

03.02.2017

Gandhi Kalvi Nilayam High v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gandhi Kalvi Nilayam High v. The State of Tamil Nadu

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

Tamil Nadu Association for Vs State of Tamil Nadu

Savithri Vs The Collector

S.Sowmiya Vs The Government of Tamilnadu

Mr.S.Lakshmikanthan, Vs State rep by the

Sri Vellaivinayahar Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu

Ellapa @ Lingappa, Vs The District Revenue Officer