Dismissed¶50

J.Santhi v. the District Collector

Madras HC23 Jun 2025WP/19407/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Keywords: noon meal organizer; transfer order; cancellation of transfer; re-transfer; malafide intention; administrative grounds; writ of certiorari; writ of mandamus; Article 226; Government Boys Higher Secondary School Rayakottai; Panchayat Union Middle School (Urudu) Rayakottai; Krishnagiri; Kelamangalam; District Collector; Block Development Officer; charge not handed over; salary arrears representation. Bench: single member (C. Kumarappan, J.). No precedent cases cited; no dissenting opinion.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the petitioner to submit a representation regarding any salary arrears within one week of receipt of the order; respondents directed to consider it and pass orders on its own merits and in accordance with law within two weeks thereafter; connected Miscellaneous Petition (W.M.P.No.21662 of 2025) closed; no costs.

J.Santhi Vs the District Collector — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶50

Issue for consideration

Whether the order dated 02.05.2025 transferring the petitioner to Panchayat Union Middle School (Urudu), Rayakottai is tainted with any malafide intention. +1 more

¶48

Court's answer

There is no malafide on the part of the transferring authority and no infirmity in the transfer order dated 02.05.2025 (which directed the petitioner to join duty at Panchayat Union Middle School (Urudu), Rayakottai on administrative grounds).

¶49

Ratio / Principle

Since there is no infirmity in the transfer order dated 02.05.2025, the question of directing the first to third respondents to hand over charge to the petitioner at Government Boys Higher Secondary School, Rayakottai does not arise.

¶49

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Madras High Court (C. Kumarappan, J.), common order dated 23.06.2025 dismissing two connected writ petitions of J. Santhi, Noon Meal Organizer: W.P.No.15353 of 2025 sought a Writ of Mandamus (Article 226, Constitution of India) to direct respondents 1-3 to hand over charge at Government Boys Higher Secondary School, Rayakottai pursuant to re-transfer order dated 05.03.2025; W.P.No.19407 of 2025 sought a Writ of Certiorari to quash the order dated 02.05.2025 (Na.Ka.No.12146/2024/X1) cancelling that re-transfer and posting her at Panchayat Union Middle School (Urudu), Rayakottai. Framing the sole point whether the transfer order was tainted with malafide intention, the Court found the order was made on administrative grounds, detected no malafide or infirmity, concluded no direction to hand over charge arose, dismissed both writ petitions and the connected miscellaneous petition without costs, and granted liberty to seek consideration of any salary arrears via representation within one week, to be acted upon within two weeks thereafter.

¶1

W.P.Nos.19407 and 15353 of 2025

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED : 23.06.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN

¶6

W.P.Nos.19407 and 15353 of 2025 and

¶7

W.M.P.No.21662 of 2025

¶8

W.P.No.19407 of 2025

J.Santhi

... Petitioner

Vs.

The District Collector, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.

¶13

The Block Development Officer, Kelamangalam Union, Rayakottai Taluk, Krishnagiri.

¶14

The Personal Assistant to District Collector, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri. ... Respondents

¶15

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, to call for entire records of the first respondent which culminated in the impugned proceedings in Na.Ka.No.12146/2024/X1 dated 02.05.2025 and consequential impugned

¶16

1/7

¶17

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

¶18

W.P.Nos.19407 and 15353 of 2025

¶19

proceedings of the third respondent in Na.Ka.No.12146/2024/X1 dated 02.05.2025 and quash the same as illegal and arbitrary.

¶20

For Petitioner : Ms.S.Suneetha

¶21

For Respondents : Mr.N.Naveen Kumar, Government Advocate

¶22

W.P.No.15353 of 2025

J.Santhi

... Petitioner

Vs.

The District Collector, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.

¶27

The Block Development Officer, Kelamangalam Union, Rayakottai Taluk, Krishnagiri.

¶28

The Personal Assistant to District Collector, Krishnagiri District, Krishnagiri.

¶29

R.Padmavathy ... Respondents

¶30

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to issue the charges to the petitioner as the 'noon-meal organiser' in Government Boys Higher Secondary School, Rayakottai pursuant to transfer order issued by the first respondent vide proceedings in

¶31

2/7

¶32

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

¶33

W.P.Nos.19407 and 15353 of 2025

¶34

Na.Ka.No.12146/2024/X1 dated 05.03.2025.

¶35

For Petitioner : Ms.S.Suneetha For Respondents : Mr.N.Naveen Kumar, Government Advocate (for R1 & R3) Mrs.K.Vasantha Mala, Government Advocate (for R2) *****

¶36

C O M M O N O R D E R

¶37

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner

¶38

was working as Noon Meal Organizer at Government Boys Higher Secondary, Rayakottai and by order dated 11.11.2024, she was transferred to the Panchayat Union Middle School (Urudu), Rayakottai. Subsequently, she was re-transferred vide order dated 05.03.2025 to the Government Boys Higher Secondary School, Rayakottai. It is the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that though the petitioner was posted as Noon Meal Organizer Government Boys Higher Secondary School, Rayakottai, she has not been given a charge to perform duty. In the meanwhile, the first respondent passed another order dated 02.05.2025 cancelling the earlier transfer order dated 05.03.2025 and in result, the petitioner is now posted at Panchayat Union Middle School (Urudu), Rayakottai as Noon Meal

¶39

3/7

¶40

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

¶41

W.P.Nos.19407 and 15353 of 2025

¶42

Organizer. In W.P. No. 15353 of 2025, the petitioner has sought for a direction to the the respondents 1 to 3 to issue charge to the petitioner in Government Boys Higher Secondary School, Rayakottai pursuant to the aforesaid transfer order dated 05.03.2025 issued by the first respondent. In W.P. No. 19407 of 2025, the petitioner has challenged the aforesaid order dated 02.05.2025. The ground for challenge is that the petitioner has not been given charge to perform duty at Government Boys Higher Secondary School, Rayakottai and when she raised certain objections, she was transferred to Panchayat Union Middle School (Urudu), Rayakottai.

¶43

The said contention was strongly objected by the learned Government Advocate. He would further submit that it is the petitioner who had refused to take charge and that there are no impediment for the petitioner to perform her duty.

¶44

I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made on either side.

¶45

4/7

¶46

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

¶47

W.P.Nos.19407 and 15353 of 2025

¶48

Though there are numerous issues, the point to be considered is whether the order transferring the petitioner to Panchayat Union Middle School (Urudu), Rayakottai is tainted with any malafide intention.

¶49

While looking at the impugned order dated 02.05.2025, the first respondent has directed the petitioner to join duty at Panchayat Union Middle School (Urudu), Rayakottai as Noon Meal Organizer on administrative grounds. In such view of the matter, this Court does not find any malafide on the part of the transferring authority and there is no infirmity in the transfer order dated 02.05.2025 issued by the third respondent. When it is found that there is no infirmity in the transfer order, the question of directing the first to third respondents to hand over charge to the petitioner in Government Boys Higher Secondary School, Rayakottai does not arise.

¶50

Accordingly, these Writ Petitions are dismissed. However, if there

¶51

are any salary arrears, the petitioner is given liberty to submit a representation to the respondents, within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. On such representation, the respondents are directed to consider the same and pass orders on its own merits and in

¶52

5/7

¶53

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

¶54

W.P.Nos.19407 and 15353 of 2025

¶55

accordance with law, within a period of two weeks thereafter. Consequently,

¶56

the connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed. No costs.

¶57

23.06.2025