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

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

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

No relief granted; both writ petitions dismissed with no order as to costs, with liberty to complain before the competent authority if legal rights are affected.

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ petitions are maintainable against the communications between the District Educational Officer and the Chief Minister's Complaints Cell, which merely conveyed the petitioner's grievance and the action taken thereon. +1 more

Court's answer

The challenged documents are merely communications between the District Educational Officer and the Chief Minister's Complaints Cell regarding allegations which have already been duly considered; accordingly the Court is unable to see how the present writ petitions are maintainable.

Ratio / Principle

Although the petitioner alleges a violation of the reservation policy, he is admittedly not directly affected by the impugned proceedings and cannot invoke the Court's jurisdiction unless his personal rights have been infringed.

Key takeaways

If the petitioner has any grievance regarding appointments made in a particular school and his legal rights are affected, he is at liberty to make an appropriate complaint before the competent authority in the prescribed manner.obiter¶55

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WRIT PETITIONS — MAINTAINABILITY — LOCUS STANDI: Petitioner, a third party, filed two writ petitions under Article 226 challenging communications dated 29.06.2019 of the District Educational Officer to the Chief Ministers Complaints Cell, which conveyed his grievance that one D. Kamaraj was appointed in Pudhur Hindu Nadar Higher Secondary School by using forged certificates and the action taken thereon, alleging violation of the Government's reservation policy. Held (K. Rajasekar, J.): (i) the impugned communications are merely correspondence between the District Educational Officer and the Chief Minister's Complaints Cell regarding allegations already duly considered, and the writ petitions are not maintainable; (ii) the petitioner, admittedly not directly affected by the impugned proceedings, cannot invoke the Court's jurisdiction unless his personal rights are infringed; (iii) liberty reserved to make an appropriate complaint before the competent authority in the prescribed manner if his legal rights are affected. Writ petitions dismissed. No costs.

W.P.(MD).Nos.16346 and 16352 of 2019

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 21.08.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR

W.P.(MD).Nos.16346 and 16352 of 2019

P.Gurusamy

... Petitioner in

both WPs Vs.

1.The Director of School Education, O/o.the Director of School Education, College Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai.

2.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

3.The Chief Educational Officer, O/o. The Chief Educational Officer, Thoothukudi District.

4.The District Educational Officer, VOC Government High School Complex, Ettayapuram Road, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District.

5.The District Employment Officer, District Employment Office, Thoothukudi District.

Page 1 of 8

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

W.P.(MD).Nos.16346 and 16352 of 2019

6.T.S.P. Duraipandian

7.D.Kamaraj

8.Pudur Therkku Muthaiahpuram, Kulakaattankurichi Nadargal Uravinmurai Kalvi Sangam, rep. through its Secretary, Pudur – 628 905 Vilathikulam Taluk, Thoothukudi District.

.. Respondents in WP(MD).No.16346 of 2019

1.The Director of School Education, O/o.the Director of School Education, College Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai.

2.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

3.The Chief Educational Officer, O/o. The Chief Educational Officer, Thoothukudi District.

4.The District Educational Officer, VOC Government High School Complex, Ettayapuram Road, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District.

5.T.S.P. Duraipandian

6.D.Kamaraj

Page 2 of 8

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

W.P.(MD).Nos.16346 and 16352 of 2019

8.Pudur Therkku Muthaiahpuram, Kulakaattankurichi Nadargal Uravinmurai Kalvi Sangam, rep. through its Secretary, Pudur – 628 905 Vilathikulam Taluk, Thoothukudi District.

.. Respondents in WP(MD).No.16352 of 2019

PRAYER in W.P (MD).No.16346 of 2019: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Certiorarifed Mandamus call for the records of the impugned order in Ref.Letter No.2440/Aa2/2019, dated 29.06.2019 issued by the 4^th respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 5 to take tangible actions against the 7^th respondent.

PRAYER in W.P (MD).No.16352 of 2019: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of Certiorarifed Mandamus to call for the records relating to the impugned order in Ref.Letter No. 2417 /Aa2/2019, dated 29.06.2019 issued by the 4^th respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to take tangible actions against the 7^th respondent.

For Petitioner in both W.Ps. : Ms.S. Devasena For Respondents 1 to 5 in W.P(MD).No.16346 of 2019 For respondents 1 to 4 in W.P(MD).No.16352 of 2019 : Mr. N.Satheesh Kumar Additional Government Pleader For Respondents 6 to 8 in W.P(MD).No.16346 of 2019 For respondents 5 to 7 in W.P(MD).No.16352 of 2019 : Mr. J. Bharathan

Page 3 of 8

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

W.P.(MD).Nos.16346 and 16352 of 2019

COMMON ORDER

The Writ Petition in W.P (MD).No.16346 of 2019 has been filed to call for the records of the impugned order in Ref. Letter No.2440/Aa2/2019, dated 29.06.2019 issued by the 4^th respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 5 to take tangible actions against the 7^th respondent.

The Writ Petition in W.P (MD).No.16352 of 2019 has been filed to call for the records relating to the impugned order in Ref.Letter No.2417 /Aa2/2019, dated 29.06.2019 issued by the 4^th respondent and quash the same and consequently direct the respondents 1 to 4 to take tangible actions against the 7^th respondent.

These Writ Petitions have been filed challenging the communications of the District Educational Officer to the Chief Ministers Complaints Cell for the grievance submitted by petitioner herein viz., Gurusamy.

On perusal of the said communications, it is seen that the petitioner herein raised a grievance alleging that one Mr. Kamaraj was appointed in

Page 4 of 8

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

W.P.(MD).Nos.16346 and 16352 of 2019

Pudhur Hindu Nadar Higher Secondary School by using forged certificates. Since the grievance raised pertains to the Education Department, the Department of Education forwarded the same to the 2^nd respondent. The 2^nd respondent, in turn, communicated the details of the grievance received and the action taken thereon by the respondent officials. Now, the petitioner has challenged these proceedings of the District Educational Officer and seeks a direction to the respondent officials to take action against the said private individuals.

Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.

This Court is unable to understand how the present Writ Petitions are maintainable. The communications in question are merely between the District Educational Officer and the Chief Minister’s Complaints Cell, regarding certain allegations, and the same have already been duly considered.

On perusal of the affidavit, it is seen that the petitioner claims a violation of the Government’s reservation policy in making appointments.

Page 5 of 8

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

W.P.(MD).Nos.16346 and 16352 of 2019

However, admittedly, the petitioner is not directly affected by the impugned proceedings. Even though he alleges a violation, he cannot invoke this Court’s jurisdiction unless his personal rights have been infringed.

In such circumstances, if the petitioner has any grievance regarding appointments made in a particular school, and if his legal rights are affected, he is at liberty to make an appropriate complaint before the competent authority in the prescribed manner.

With the above observations, these Writ Petitions are dismissed. No

costs.

21.08.2025

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No trp

Page 6 of 8

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

W.P.(MD).Nos.16346 and 16352 of 2019

To

1.The Director of School Education, O/o.the Director of School Education, College Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai.

2.The District Collector, Thoothukudi District, Thoothukudi.

3.The Chief Educational Officer, O/o. The Chief Educational Officer, Thoothukudi District.

4.The District Educational Officer, VOC Government High School Complex, Ettayapuram Road, Kovilpatti, Thoothukudi District.

5.The District Employment Officer, District Employment Office, Thoothukudi District.

Page 7 of 8

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

W.P.(MD).Nos.16346 and 16352 of 2019

K.RAJASEKAR,J.

trp

W.P.(MD).Nos.16346 and 16352 of 2019

21.08.2025

Page 8 of 8

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