Disposed

Tirupur School for The Deaf v. The State Commissioner for Welfare of the Differently Abled (Fac)

Madras HC21 Mar 2022WP/6558/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court issued a Writ of Mandamus under Article 226 directing the 2nd Respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 29.01.2022 seeking an extension of time for furnishing approvals regarding the school and to pass a reasoned order within two weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd Respondent to consider the representation dated 29.01.2022 and pass a suitable order on merits within two weeks.

Tirupur School for The Deaf Vs The State… — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 21.03.2022

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.BHARATHIDASAN

¶5

W.P.No.6558 of 2022

¶6

Tirupur School for the Deaf, rep. by its Correspondent Mrs.M.Jayanthi, Tirupur School for the Deaf, Murugampalayam, Iduvampalayam (Po), Tirupur-641 687. ...Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The State Commissioner for Welfare of the Differently Abled (FAC), Lady Willington College Campus, No.5, Kamaraj Salai, Chennai-600 005.

¶9

The District Differently Abled Welfare Officer, District Differently Abled Welfare Office, Tirupur – 641 687. ...Respondents

¶10

Prayer : Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the 2^nd Respondent to extend the time for furnishing the necessary approvals as required in his order dated 19.01.2022 in light of the petitioner's representation dated 29.01.2022 in the light of petitioner's representation dated 29.01.2022.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.K.S.Karthik Raja For Respondents : Mr.C.Jayaprakash, Government Advocate

¶12

The Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction directing the 2^nd respondent to grant approval to the petitioner's school by its representation dated 19.01.2022.

¶13

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

¶14

According to the petitioner, she is running a school for special children. Earlier, approval was granted to the petitioner's school and it has been periodically renewed. But, due to some deficiency, the petitioner's school approval was not renewed and the petitioner was asked to comply with deficiency on or before 31.01.2022. Since the petitioner could not comply with deficiency within the prescribed time before the authorities, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 29.01.2022 to the 2^nd respondent seeking for extension of time to comply with the same till 29.04.2022, but so far, no order has been passed. Hence, the present Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner.

¶15

Heard and considered rival submissions made by learned counsel appearing for both sides and perused the records carefully.

¶16

Considering the limited prayer sought in the Writ Petition, without going into the merits of the case, the 2^nd respondent is directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 29.01.2022 and to pass suitable orders on merits in accordance with law after hearing the petitioner within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Accordingly, this Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs.

s/d-

Assistant Registrar

True Copy

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶21

rpp To

¶22

The State Commissioner

¶23

for Welfare of the Differently

¶24

Abled (FAC), Lady Willington College Campus, No.5, Kamaraj Salai, Chennai-600 005.

¶25

The District Differently Abled

¶26

Welfare Officer,

¶27

District Differently Abled

¶28

Welfare Office, Tirupur – 641 687. +1 Cc to The Government Pleader sr 19167

W.P.No.6558 of 2022

PA(CO)

SP(25/03/2022)

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

Tirupur School for The Deaf v. The State Commissioner for Welfare of the Differently Abled (Fac)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tirupur School for The Deaf v. The State Commissioner for Welfare of the Differently Abled (Fac)

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

Syed Sultan Vs The Chairman

P.Milany Vs O.Panneerselvam

Pallikaranai Anna Nagar Pakuthi Veetu Manai Veetu Urimaiyaarkal Variseluthuvor Podhunala Sangam Vs a.R.Rahulnadh

M.Karpagam Vs The Commissioner

G.Chidambaram Vs The Managing Director

Jayalakshmi Vs the Commissioner