LAWS(MAD)-2011-2-371

B THARUNAN Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT

Decided On February 02, 2011
B. THARUNAN, S/O. L. BALASUBRAMANIAN Appellant
V/S
SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, CHENNAI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By consent, the Writ Petition is taken up for disposal. Heard Mr. N. Sundaresan for M/s. Sun A ssociates, counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. R. Manoharan, Government Advocate, appearing for the Respondents 1 to 5 and Mr. G.R. Swaminathan, counsel for the sixth Respondent.

(2.) The Petitioner, who is the father of the student affected with dyslexia, approached this Court with a prayer to direct the fourth Respondent to provide concessions eligible to his son, namely, B. Tharunan as per the Government order in G.O. Ms. No. 110 Department of School Education, dated 17.07.2003.

(3.) According to the Petitioner, his son B. Tharunan was born on 29.10.1995 and admitted at the age of four in a Primary School at Sivagangai and thereafter, at Ramakrishna Mission Higher Secondary School (South), Chennai. Normally, his activities are like that of other children, but while writing the subjects, he used to mix up the language of his mother tongue, viz., in Tamil with English. Initially, it was under the impression that this is due to careless and even the teachers of the school were also opined that his concentration gets diverted and so, the mistakes had crept in. In the same manner, when a question pose to him, he answers correctly, but when he is asked to write, he commits mistakes. It was noticed repeatedly that there were complaints from the School teachers also. Later on, his son was put under serious medical tests and they came to know that he was suffering from a disease known as 'Dyslexia'. Immediately, the Petitioner took his son to a Non-Governmental Organisation, by name, 'the Madras Dyslexia Association', who conducts a school especially for dyslexic students at T. Nagar Chennai. Subsequently, the said Association conducted various tests to his son both oral and written and found that the Petitioner's son is able to answer correctly for the questions put to him, but while writing, he is committing mistakes. Finally, they concluded that his son was suffering from 'Dyslexia' and accordingly, they gave a report.