BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 10.11.2023 CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.PUGALENDHI W.P.(MD)Nos.3783 to 3789 of 2018 and W.M.P.(MD)Nos.3921 to 3933 and 3938 of 2018 W.P.(MD)No.3783 of 2018 J.Hameed Asraf Rep. by his Natural Guardian, Jamal Nazar ... Petitioner versus

1. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by its Secretary, School Department, Secretariat, St. George Fort, Chennai.

2. The Director, Public Examination Department, School Education Director Complex, College Road, Chennai – 6.

3. The Joint Director, Public Examination Department, School Education Director Complex, College Road, Chennai – 6.

4. The Regional Deputy Director, Public Examination Department, Madurai.

5. The Regional Deputy Director, Public Examination Department, Tirunelveli.

6. District Chief Educational Officer, District Chief Education Office, Virudhunagar.

7. District Educational Officer, District Education Office, Srivilliputtur. ... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking for the issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records in Notification dated 28.12.2017 (bra;jpf;Fwpg;g[) on the file of 2^nd respondent and quash the same as illegal, void, unconstitutional and to direct the respondents to permit the petitioner to submit the application to write examination in the 10^th standard Public Examination to be held on March/April, 2018 within the time frame by this Court.

For Petitioner : Mr.S.Ramesh For Respondents : Mr.G.V.Vairam Santhosh Additional Government Pleader

COMMON ORDER

The petitioners are parents, whose wards have applied for 10^th Standard examination as private students and have filed this batch of writ petitions as against the Notification dated 28.12.2017 issued by the second respondent that it was illegal, unconstitutional and for a consequential direction to permit their wards to submit their applications to write examination in the 10^th Standard Public Examination to be held in the month of March-April 2018.

2. When these writ petitions are taken up for hearing, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks time to get instructions from the petitioners.

3. The learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, by referring to the prayer sought for in these writ petitions, submits that these writ petitions are filed challenging the Notification dated 28.12.2017, wherein, the 2^nd respondent has invited applications from the candidates, who are intending to write 10^th Standard Examination privately. In view of the lapse of time, the relief sought for in these writ petitions have become infructuous.

4. This Court perused the affidavit filed in support of these writ petitions.

5. The petitioners claim that their wards were intending to write

10^th Standard public examinations for the year 2018. The Government, vide G.O.Ms.No.190, School Education Department dated 29.11.2011, has prescribed certain conditions for the candidates who are appearing as private students. As per the said G.O., the private students must have undergone practical training and for that, they shall apply to the concerned District Educational Officer, where the student resides and after receipt of the applications, the District Educational Officer shall fix a date for practical training on Saturday and on other holidays, for which, fee was also fixed. Further, the Government, vide G.O.No.144, School Education Department, dated 20.09.2011, insisted upon 80% of attendance in the practical training for a student.

6. The 7^th respondent fixed the dates for practical classes on

06.01.2018, 13.01.2018, 20.01.2018, 27.01.2018 and 03.02.2018. In the meantime, the date was announced for 10^th standard Board Examination by the Director of Government Examination for March/April 2018. On 02.01.2018, the respondents opened “Special Permission Scheme” to receive the application from the private students for 10^th standard Government Examination and the same was closed on 04.01.2018. Accord