Disposed¶30

P. Kandapalanivel v. The Director of School Education

Writ of Mandamus – Duty of statutory authority to decide representation

Madras HC21 Jan 2025WP(MD)/1392/2025

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Mandamus; consideration of representation dated 02.09.2024; recognition and approval for CBSE school; Dr.K.P.V.School, Thanjavur; Matriculation-to-CBSE conversion; local authority approval 2018; duty of statutory authority to pass orders; dereliction of duty; Article 226; eight-week compliance timeline; Director of School Education; Chief Education Officer; Madras High Court Madurai Bench; 21.01.2025; L. Victoria Gowri, J.; writ disposed, no costs.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to consider the petitioner's representation dated 02.09.2024 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within eight (8) weeks from receipt of a copy of the order; no order as to costs. ¶30

P. Kandapalanivel Vs The Director of School Education — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶30

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondents are obliged to consider the petitioner's representation dated 02.09.2024 seeking Recognition and Approval for Dr.K.P.V.School CBSE, Thanjavur, and pass orders thereon. +1 more

¶19

Court's answer

Whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon the respondent to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely.

¶26

Ratio / Principle

Non-consideration of the representation by the Statutory Authority amounts to dereliction of duty, justifying invocation of the extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶29

Key takeaways

Operative direction: the respondents shall consider the petitioner's representation dated 02.09.2024 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within eight (8) weeks from receipt of a copy of the order.ratio¶30

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ of Mandamus – Duty of statutory authority to decide representation – Correspondent of Dr.K.P.V.School CBSE, Thanjavur sought Recognition and Approval by representation dated 02.09.2024 to the Director of School Education and the Chief Education Officer, Thanjavur. Government Advocate stated the local-authority approval was for construction of a Matriculation school whereas approval sought was for a CBSE school; petitioner's counsel relied on the amended building plan approved by local authorities in 2018 upon conversion to a CBSE school. HELD (L. Victoria Gowri, J.): a statutory authority is duty-bound to consider such a representation on its own merits and pass appropriate orders instead of keeping it pending indefinitely; non-consideration is dereliction of duty justifying exercise of Article 226 powers. Respondents directed to consider the representation dated 02.09.2024 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within eight (8) weeks. Writ petition disposed of on these terms; no costs.

¶1

W.P.(MD).No.1392 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 21.01.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

¶6

W.P.(MD).No.1392 of 2025

¶7

P. Kandapalanivel, Correspondent, Dr.K.P.V.School, Cbse, 6/2b,6/2c Raja Raja Cholan Nagar, Srinivasapuram, Thanjavur - 613 009.

¶8

... Petitioner

¶9

Vs.

¶10

1.The Director of School Education, Office of the Directorate of School Education, D.P.I. Campus, College Road, Chennai.

¶11

2.The Chief Education Officer, Chief Education Office, Panagal Building, Thanjavur. ... Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 02.09.2024 and to grant Recognition and Approval in favour of the Dr.K.P.V.School CBSE, situated at Raja Raja Cholan Nagar, Srinivasapuram, Thanjavur - 613 009 within the time stipulated by this Court.

¶13

1/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶14

W.P.(MD).No.1392 of 2025

¶15

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Venkatesan

¶16

For Respondents : Mr.T.Amjad Khan, Government Advocate

¶17

ORDER

¶18

By consent of both the parties, this writ petition is taken up for final hearing at the admission stage itself.

¶19

2.This writ petition is filed to direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 02.09.2024 and to grant Recognition and Approval in favour of Dr.K.P.V.School CBSE, situated at Raja Raja Cholan Nagar, Srinivasapuram, Thanjavur - 613 009.

¶20

3.Heard the learned counsels on either sides and carefully perused the materials available on record.

¶21

4.When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents, Mr.T.Amjad Khan, on instructions submitted that the approval which has been obtained by the school from the local authorities is for construction of a Matriculation school. However, the approval which is sought for

¶22

2/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶23

W.P.(MD).No.1392 of 2025

¶24

now is with respect to the C.B.S.E. school. Hence, there is an impediment in considering the petitioner's representation.

¶25

5.Per contra, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that though the school obtained permission at the earliest for the establishment of a Matriculation school, later when the educational agency decided to convert the same as a C.B.S.E. School, proper amendment was carried out in the building plan, and due proper approval has already been obtained from the local authorities as early as in the year 2018 itself. Hence, the representation made by the petitioner with respect to the grant of approval for running a C.B.S.E. school can very well be considered by the respondent authorities.

¶26

6.It is needless to point out that whenever a representation of this nature is made to a Statutory Authority, there is a duty cast upon the respondent to consider the same on its own merits and pass appropriate orders in one way or other instead of keeping the same pending indefinitely. As such, non-consideration of the representation made by the Statutory Authority would amount to

¶27

3/5 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶28

W.P.(MD).No.1392 of 2025

¶29

dereliction of duty and hence, this Court will be justified in invoking the extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

¶30

7.In view of the said submission made by the learned Government Advocate, this Court hereby direct the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 02.09.2024 and pass appropriate orders in accordance with law within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶31