BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Date of Reserving the Order Date of Pronouncing the Order

06.11.2025 19.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.KUMARESH BABU

W.P.(MD) No.26999 of 2025

and W.M.P.(MD) No.20970 of 2025

S.Messiahs Antony Durairaj … Petitioner

-vs-

1.The Chief Educational Officer,

Thoothukuri,

Thoothukudi District.

2.The District Educational Officer,

Thoothukuri,

Thoothukudi District.

3.The Corporate Manager of R.C.School,

Tuticorin Diocesan Association,

Catholic Bishop's House,

No.82. Great Cotton Road,

Thoothukudi – 628 001.

4.St.Mary's Higher Secondary School,

Represented by its Correspondent,

Pothakalanvilai – 628 702, Thoothukudi District.

5.Bro.Benitto, Advocate/ Enquiry Officer, Social Action Centre, Ayanporuvai, Trichy District – 621 308. ... Respondents PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondents 3 and 4 to provide the subsistence allowance for the period commencing from the date of the order of suspension i.e.,16.08.2017 till 15.12.2017 and thereafter full salary for the remaining period till date and arrears, along with interest before commencing the proposed enquiry, pursuant to the Ref.No.SZ/2025/22 dated 30.07.2025 and Ref.No.SZ/2025/23 dated 31.07.2025 on the file of the third respondent and pass such other order.

For Petitioner : Mr.Robert Chandra Kumar For Respondents : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar for RR1 and 2 Additional Government Pleader : Mr.Savarimuthu for RR3 to 5 for M/s.Xavier Associates

O R D E R

This Writ Petition has been filed for directing the respondents 3 and 4 to provide the subsistence allowance for the period commencing from the date of the order of suspension i.e.,16.08.2017 till 15.12.2017 and thereafter full salary for the remaining period till date and arrears, along with interest before commencing the proposed enquiries dated 30.07.2025 and 31.07.2025 on the file of the 3^rd respondent.

2) Heard, Mr.Robert Chandra Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr.N.Satheeshkumar, learned Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents 1 & 2 and Mr.Savarimuthu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents 3 to 5

3) The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner was working as an Office Assistant in the fourth respondent/ school. While so, on 16.08.2017, the third respondent had issued an order of suspension and a show cause notice was also served on the petitioner on 05.09.2017. In spite of the explanation submitted by the petitioner on 08.09.2017, a charge memo was issued to the petitioner on 21.09.2017. An enquiry had been conducted even before the submission of the reply by the petitioner. He would submit that without properly conducting an enquiry, a enquiry report came to be filed, upon which the petitioner was also called upon to submit his further explanation. The petitioner had pointed out severe infirmities in his explanation. But, however without considering the same, an order of dismissal came to be passed.

4) Challenging the same, the petitioner had approached this Court by in W.P.(MD).No.124 of 2018 and Hon'ble Court by its order dated 20.06.2022 had set aside the order of dismissal and remitted the matter back to the third respondent for conducting a fresh enquiry. He would submit that as per the Provisions of Tamil Nadu Private Schools Regulation Act 1973, no suspension can remain imposed for a period of more than two months from the date of suspension and for the reasons to be recorded in writing, a further period of two (2) months can be extended. Even though, the management had preferred an Intra Court Appeal, when the matter was taken up for hearing on 09.06.2025, the Management had not pressed the Intra-Court Appeal and recording the same this Court had dismissed the Intra-Court Appeal as not-pressed. Thereafter, the third respondent had communicated to the petitioner appointing fifth respondent as enquiry officer.

5) He would submit