Disposed

M.Manoharan v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Madras HC23 Feb 2024WP/13044/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner sought writ of mandamus for upgradation to Physical Director under G.O.Ms.No.525. The court held the G.O. applied to aided/private schools, not government schools. The writ petition was disposed of by directing respondents to decide the petitioner's representation within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directing respondents to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representation submitted by the petitioner within a period of three months.

M.Manoharan Vs The State of Tamil Nadu — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.No. 13044 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 23.02.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE BATTU DEVANAND

¶6

W.P.No. 13044 of 2018 and

¶7

W.M.P.No. 15326 of 2018

M. Manoharan

... Petitioner

Vs.

1.The State of Tamil Nadu Rep., by its Secretary to Government, School Education Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶12

2.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai – 600 006.

¶13

3.The Joint Director of School Education, (Higher Secondary) College Road, Chennai – 600 006. ... Respondents

¶14

Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the respondents herein to implement the G.OMs.No.525, School Education (D1) Department, dated 29.12.1997 by upgrading the petitioner to the post of Physical Director since 29.12.1997 on par the petitioner in W.P.No.21191/2012 dated 10.07.2014 with all attendant benefits along with arrears of salary and pension.

¶15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶16

1/6

¶17

For Petitioner : Mr. J. Selvarajan For Respondents : Mr. V. Manoharan, Additional Government Pleader

¶18

O R D E R

¶19

W.P.No. 13044 of 2018

¶20

This Writ Petition has been filed for issuance of writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to implement G.O.Ms.No.525, School Education (D1) Department dated 29.12.1997 by upgrading the petitioner to the post of Physical Director since 29.12.1997 with all attendant benefits along with arrears of salary and pension.

¶21

Heard, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional

¶22

Government Pleader appearing for the respondents and perused the materials available on record.

¶23

The case of the petitioner is that he has been working as Physical Education Teacher at Government Higher Secondary School, Kalambur, Tiruvannamalai District and retired from service in the month of May 2016. He is entitled to be upgraded to the post of Physical Director as per G.O.Ms.No.525, School Education (D1) Department dated 29.12.1997. However, his request has not been considered by the respondents so far. Against the illegal and arbitrary action of the respondents, the petitioner filed this writ petition.

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

2/6

¶26

W.P.No. 13044 of 2018

¶27

On behalf of the respondents, a counter affidavit has been filed. It is

¶28

averred in the said counter that the G.O.Ms.No.525, dated 29.12.1997, was issued for the purpose of revision of norms for assessment of grant of teaching posts in the recognised private schools / aided private schools. As such, the petitioner is not entitled for seeking relief as per G.O.Ms.No.525 for upgradation as Physical Director.

¶29

Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader for the respondents advanced their arguments based on the averments made in the affidavit of the petitioner and counter affidavit of the respondents.

¶30

On perusal of G.O.Ms.No.525, it appears that it was issued for the purpose of fixation of staff strength in Elementary / Higher Secondary Schools governed by the state aid.

¶31

Admittedly, the petitioner worked in the Government School and retired. However, at the stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner had submitted a representation dated 15.03.2018 to the respondents and it

¶32

is not considered so far and he further contends that non consideration of his

¶33

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

3/6

¶35

W.P.No. 13044 of 2018

¶36

representation and not passing any orders is illegal and unjust.

¶37

On the other hand, the learned Additional Government Pleader

¶38

appearing for the respondents submit that though a copy of the representation dated 15.03.2018 is filed as material paper along with this writ petition, there is no acknowledgement to prove that the representation is submitted to the respondents really.

¶39

Under these circumstances, in the considered opinion of this Court, it is appropriate to dispose of this writ petition without going into the merits of the case with a direction to the respondents to dispose of the representation dated 15.03.2018 of the petitioner, if really it received by the respondents within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order by following due process of law. If that representation is not received by the respondents, the petitioner is permitted to submit a copy of the representation afresh to the respondents to meet the interest of justice.

¶40

10. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the respondents

¶41

to consider and pass appropriate orders on the representation submitted by the petitioner by following due process of law within a period of three months from the

¶42

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶43

4/6

¶44

W.P.No. 13044 of 2018

¶45

date of receipt of copy of this order.

¶46

11. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶47

12. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶48

23.02.2024

¶49

Index :Yes/No

¶50

Neutral Citation :Yes/No

¶51

¶52

¶53

1.The Secretary to Government, State of Tamil Nadu School Education Department, Secretariat, Chennai – 600 009.

¶54

2.The Director of School Education, College Road, Chennai – 600 006.

¶55

3.The Joint Director of School Education, (Higher Secondary) College Road, Chennai – 600 006.

¶56

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶57

5/6

¶58

W.P.No. 13044 of 2018

¶59

BATTU DEVANAND, J.

¶60

¶61

W.P.No. 13044 of 2018 and W.M.P.No. 15326 of 2018

¶62

23.02.2024

¶63

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶64

6/6

M.Manoharan v. The State of Tamil Nadu

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Manoharan 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

S. Ananda Selvakumar Vs The Commissioner

Navarani @ Mary Navarani, Vs Principal Accountant General

Mrs. Uma Maheswari Vs The Chief Executive Enggineer

R.Surendhiran Vs Managing Director

J.Shanthi Vs The Director of Elementary

C.Babu, Vs The Government of Tamil Nadu