Allowed

Hajara, v. The District Educational Officer

Madras HC6 Jun 2024WP(MD)/8310/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition against an order cancelling the petitioner's salary disbursal from 01.02.2018. Following a compromise closing a related civil revision petition and contempt petition, and the fourth respondent's consent, the Court quashed the order passed without notice as violating natural justice and directed salary disbursement.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order quashed; respondents directed to disburse petitioner's salary and consider her case within twelve weeks.

Hajara, Vs The District Educational Officer — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2024)

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.8310 of 2020

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 06.06.2024

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.8310 of 2020 and

¶7

W.M.P.(MD)Nos.7706 and 9382 of 2020 and 12395 of 2023

¶8

Hajara ...Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The District Educational Officer,

¶11

Tenkasi District, Tenkasi.

¶12

2.The District Elementary Educational Officer, Tirunelveli.

¶13

3.The Manager, Masood Thaika Middle School, Kadayanallur, Tenkasi District.

¶14

Moulavi O.M.A.Uduman Mydeen ... Respondents

¶15

(4^th respondent is impleaded vide Court order dated 06.06.2024 made in W.M.P.(MD)No.9382 of 2020 in W.P.(MD)No.8310 of 2020)

¶16

1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

W.P.(MD).No.8310 of 2020

¶18

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 1^st respondent in Na.Ka.No.2227 / A4 / 2019, dated 20.09.2019 and quash the same.

¶19

For Petitioner : Mr.A.N.Ramanathan For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.M.Sarangan, Additional Government Pleader For R-3 : Mr.T.S.Mohammed Mohideen For R-4 : Mr.V.Meenakshi Sundaram

¶20

ORDER

¶21

This writ petition has been filed to quash the impugned order passed by the 1 st respondent, dated 20.09.2019, cancelling the order of disbursing salary with effect from 01.02.2018 dated 01.03.2018.

¶22

The said order came to be passed without notice in a hasty manner by the 1 st respondent, in view of the interim order passed by this Court in C.R.P. (NPD)(MD)No. 324 of 2005 and Cont.P.(MD)No.984 of 2018, however, later in the pending Civil Revision Petition, the management of the 3 rd respondent

¶23

2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶24

W.P.(MD).No.8310 of 2020

¶25

School arrived at a compromise among themselves. On the basis of which, the aforesaid Civil Revision Petition came to be closed, vide order passed by this Court, dated 22.06.2023 and consequently, contempt petition also came to be closed on 23.06.2023.

¶26

W.M.P.(MD)No.9382 of 2020 has been filed by one Moulavi O.M.A.Uduman Mydeen to implead him as the 4^th respondent in this writ petition. Being satisfied with the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, this petition is allowed. Registry is directed to carry out the necessary amendments in the cause title.

¶27

4. W.M.P.(MD)No.12395 of 2023 has been filed by one Moulavi O.M.A.Uduman Mydeen to revoke the vakalat filed through the earlier counsel and permit him to file fresh vakalat and also permit him to defend the case on merits and in accordance with law. Being satisfied with the reasons stated in the accompanying affidavit, this petition is allowed.

¶28

3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

W.P.(MD).No.8310 of 2020

¶30

5. The 4 th respondent appeared before this Court in person and the learned counsel appearing for the 4 th respondent has submitted that he has no objection in approving the appointment of the petitioner in view of the compromise arrived between him and the 3 rd respondent School in C.R.P.(NPD) (MD)No.324 of 2005.

¶31

6. The learned Additional Government Pleader, Mr.M.Sarangan drew my attention towards the grant of interim order in C.M.P.(MD)No.745 of 2005 in C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)No.324 of 2005 and submitted that, instructions from the respondent authorities are necessary, at this point of time for the disposal of this writ petition. However, this Court is negating such submission, in view of the compromise arrived at in C.R.P.(NPD)(MD)No.324 of 2005.

¶32

Heard, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned counsels appearing for the respondents and carefully perused the materials available on record.

¶33

4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶34

W.P.(MD).No.8310 of 2020

¶35

8 . In view of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the 4 th respondent, this Court is of the considered opinion that nothing survives to proceed this writ petition anymore. However, recording the fact that the impugned order came to be passed without notice and the same is obviously an act of violation of principles of natural justice. Hence, the impugned order dated 20.09.2019 is hereby quashed and consequently, the respondents are directed to disburse the salary to the petitioner. The respondents are further directed to consider the case of the petitioner in accordance with law within a period of twelve (12) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶36

9. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶37

06.06.2024 NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes Sml

¶38

5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶39

W.P.(MD).No.8310 of 2020

¶40

¶41

1.The District Educational Officer, Tenkasi District, Tenkasi.

¶42

2.The District Elementary Educational Officer, Tirunelveli.

¶43

6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶44

W.P.(MD).No.8310 of 2020

¶45

L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J.

¶46

Sml

¶47

W.P.(MD).No.8310 of 2020

¶48

06.06.2024

¶49

7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Hajara, v. The District Educational Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hajara, v. The District Educational Officer

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

The Management Vs General Secretary

Raju.R Vs the District Child Protection Officer-Cum-

R.Revathi Vs Dr.a.Karuppasamy

S.Murugan B.a,B.Ed. Vs Chief Educational Officer

S.K. Senthilkumaran Vs Margadharsi Chits (P) Ltd.

Anisha Begum Vs The District Educational Officer