S SRIPATHI Vs. DIRECTOR OF MATRICULATION SCHOOLS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is a minor represented by his father, a resident of Idayarpalayam, Coimbatore, has filed the present writ petition seeking for a direction to provide admission to him in the 11th standard - First group in the third respondent school within a time frame as may be fixed by the court.

(2.) WHEN the mater came up on 28.06.2012, this court directed the learned Additional Government Pleader (Education) Mr.Sanjay Gandhi to take notice for respondents 1 and 2. In respect of third respondent private school, a private notice was directed to be served. Accordingly, private notice was served. On notice the third respondent has filed a detailed counter affidavit dated 1.7.2012.

(3.) IT was further stated that thereafter the petitioner's father made a representation to the third respondent and also gave a letter to the Chief Educational Officer. The parallel association also sent a letter to the Director of Matriculation Schools asking him to direct the school to admit the student. The student's father was a member of the association was of no consequences. However, after joining hands with Syed Jalal, the petitioner's father also started interference with the school management. The Inspector of Matriculation Schools acting upon the pressure had directed the management to consider giving admission to the student. Finally, the school academic council in its meeting held on 19.06.2012 agreed to accept the recommendation of the Inspector of Matriculation Schools and decided to give admission to the petitioner with a condition that he will concentrate only on studies and should give due respect to staff and school management and that his father should give an assurance that he will not interfere with the management of the school. This fact was also informed to the Inspector of Matriculation Schools. But, however the said Syed Jalal who has greater influence with the police and media gathered before the school with about 100 parents, many of them are not connected with the school along with another group called Democratic Youth Federation and started disrupting ingress and egress of teachers and students and shouted slogans against the management. The local police also supported the said Syed Jalal. But, however every day, it became the ordeal for the school. Therefore, the academic council once again met and taking into account the over all circumstances, had decided that admission should not be given to the petitioner's son as it will be detrimental to the interest of other students and management. Their school is an unaided minority school and it cannot be compelled by threat to admit any students. The teachers of the school en masse gave individual written complaints to the management not to admit the student considering his behaviour as well as his father. They had stated that it will jeopardize the interest of the school. No writ petition will lie against the management. There is no arbitrariness or illegality and violation of Article 21A of the Constitution. The school enjoys right under Article 30(1) of the Constitution and that the interest of the school is the paramount consideration of the school. Neither the student nor his father chose to accept the opportunity given to provide admission to the student.