Disposed

T.Rameshwaran v. The Chief Educational Officer

Madras HC26 Aug 2025WP(MD)/22994/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought to restrain transfer or renewal of the educational agency of Bharath Nursery and Primary School in favour of the third respondent without hearing his objections. Government Advocate stated no such proposal existed; the petitioner had a pending injunction suit. The writ petition was disposed of with liberty to pursue that suit.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to petitioner to work out remedy in O.S.No.103 of 2024 before District Munsif Court, Valliyoor; writ petition disposed of with no costs.

T.Rameshwaran Vs The Chief Educational Officer — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2025)

¶1

W.P(MD)No.22994 of 2025

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 26.08.2025

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.SARAVANAN

¶6

W.P(MD)No.22994 of 2025 and W.M.P(MD)No.18073 of 2025

¶7

T.Rameshwaran ... Petitioner

¶8

Vs.

¶9

1.The Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District.

¶10

2.The District Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District.

¶11

3.T.Jeyaraj ...Respondents

¶12

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, forbearing the respondents from transferring or renewing the Educational Agency in favour of the third respondent in respect of Bharath Nursery and Primary School, Thalavaipuram in the name of the third respondent without considering the petitioner's objections and affording an opportunity of personal hearing.

¶13

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Selva Aditya

¶14

For R1& R2 : Mr.P.T.Thiraviam Government Advocate

¶15

1/4

¶16

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

¶17

W.P(MD)No.22994 of 2025

¶18

ORDER

¶19

This writ petition has been filed for a writ of Mandamus to forbear the respondents from transferring or renewing the Educational Agency in favour of the third respondent in respect of Bharath Nursery and Primary School, Thalavaipuram in the name of the third respondent without considering the petitioner's objections and affording an opportunity of personal hearing.

¶20

The writ petition stands disposed of at the time of admission after dispensing with notice on the third respondent as no adverse orders are proposed to be passed against him.

¶21

The learned Government Advocate for the respondents 1 and 2 submits

¶22

that there is no proposal by the third respondent for transferring the educational agency in his favour.

¶23

That apart, it is noticed that the petitioner has already filed a suit for permanent injunction before the District Munsif Court, Valliyoor in O.S.No.103 of 2024, which is in consonance with Section 56 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2019.

¶24

2/4

¶25

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

¶26

W.P(MD)No.22994 of 2025

¶27

Considering the same, the writ petition stands disposed of with liberty

¶28

to the petitioner to work out the remedy in O.S.No.103 of 2024 before the District Munsif Court, Valliyoor. No costs. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶29

26.08.2025

¶30

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No sn

¶31

¶32

1.The Chief Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District.

¶33

2.The District Educational Officer, Tirunelveli District.

¶34

3/4

¶35

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

¶36

W.P(MD)No.22994 of 2025

¶37

C.SARAVANAN, J .

¶38

¶39

W.P(MD)No.22994 of 2025

¶40

26.08.2025

¶41

4/4

¶42

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

T.Rameshwaran v. The Chief Educational Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

T.Rameshwaran v. The Chief 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

Selva Steel Foundry, Vs The State Tax Officer

M/s. Vkn Contracts Vs Deputy Commercial Tax Officer

Kumar Vs The Appellate Deputy Commissioner (Gst)

A.Jothimani Vs The District Collector

Tvl Shankar Agencies Vs State Tax Officer (St)

M/s Vkg Sunlight Service Private Limited Vs The Assistant Commissioner (St)