SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DAVID LEO.S – Appellant
Versus
THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT – Respondent
WP(MD) 2019/2022



Advocates:
['M/S LAJAPATHI ROY T', '', 'Rajasekar S', 'REJOINDER AFFIDAVIT', 'ADDL T/S', 'M/S HENRI TIPHAGNE', '', 'KARUNANIDHI R', 'SPL GP', 'INDEX BOOKLETR']

W.P.(MD) No.2019 of 2022

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

Date of Reserving the Order

Date of Pronouncing the Order

04.04.2022

27.04.2022

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM

W.P.(MD) No.2019 of 2022

and

W.M.P.(MD) Nos.1735, 1737 & 2793 of 2022

S.David Leo

... Petitioner

vs.

1.The Principal Secretary to the Government

School Education Department

Fort St.George, Chennai-9

2.The Director of Elementary Education

DPI Compound

College Road, Chennai-600 006

3.The Chief Educational Officer

O/o.the Chief Educational Officer

Pudukkottai District

4.The District Educational Officer

O/o.the District Educational Officer

Aranthangi, Pudukkottai District

5.The Block Educational Officer

Thiruvarankulam Block

Pudukkottai District

6.A.Karuppian

Middle School Headmaster

Panchayat Union Middle School

Panangulam North

Thiruvarankulam Block

Pudukkottai District

7.The Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption

Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption

Collectors Nagar, Alandur

Chennai-600 016

... Respondents

[R7 is suo motu impleaded vide

Court order dated 02.03.2022]

1/14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

W.P.(MD) No.2019 of 2022

PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India for issuance of writ of certiorari to call for the records

pertaining to the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.342/A3/2022, dated

25.01.2022 on the file of the Respondent No.4 and the consequential

impugned order in Na.Ka.No.53/A2/2022 dated 25.01.2022 on the file

of the Respondent No.5 and quash the same as illegal.

For Petitioner

:

Mr.Lajapathi Roy.T.

For Respondents :

Mr.R.Baskar, Additional Advocate General

assisted by Mr.Vairam Santhosh

Additional Government Pleader for R1 to R5

Mr.Henri Tiphange for R6

Mr.A.K.Manikkam

Special Government Pleader for R7

O R D E R

The writ on hand has been instituted questioning the order

of transfer issued to the petitioner by the fourth respondent vide

proceedings dated 25.01.2022 and the consequential order issued on

the same day by the fifth respondent.

2. The petitioner was appointed in the post of Secondary

Grade Teacher on 17.03.1986 and was promoted to the post of Primary

School Headmaster on 05.06.2002 and further promoted to the post of

Middle School Headmaster on 02.06.2008 and presently working as

Headmaster in the Panchayat Union Middle School, Alangudi,

Thiruvarankulam Block, Pudukkottai District.

3. The petitioner states that to his shock and surprise,

the fourth respondent has issued the impugned order of transfer

dated 25.01.2022, which amounts to punishment. Though the

petitioner was transferred on administrative grounds, the nature of

complaint or allegation made against the petitioner has not been

explained in the impugned order. The petitioner further states that

the Parent-Teacher Association submitted a written complaint against

one Rajendran and Sujatha stating that they are misbehaving in the

school campus and an enquiry was conducted by the erstwhile Block

Educational Officer. The petitioner found that the complaint is

true and preliminary enquiry report was submitted by the Block

Educational Officer, however, no action was initiated against the

said teachers.

4. The petitioner further states that when he acted based

on the complaint of the Parent-Teacher Association, he has been

penalized by way of the impugned transfer order. According to the

petitioner, the sixth respondent, who is working as Middle School

Headmaster in Panchayat Union Middle School, Panangulam North,

Thiruvarankulam Block, Pudukkottai District, has involved in several

irregularities, including sexual harassment.

In order to

accommodate the sixth respondent in the place of the petitioner as

2/14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

W.P.(MD) No.2019 of 2022

there was a protest against the sixth respondent by the village

people

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top