D.INDRANI, Vs. DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY EDUCATION,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr.K.Vadivelu, learned counsel representing counsel on record for writ petitioner and Mr.M.Karuppasamy, learned Government Advocate on behalf of all the three respondents (official respondents) are before this Court.

(2.) With consent of learned counsel on both sides, main writ petition is taken up, heard out and is being disposed of.

(3.) This Court is informed that the School which is before this Court namely 'Shivani Nursery and Primary School' (hereinafter referred to as 'said School' for the sake of brevity) is a existing Nursery and Primary School. The crux and gravamen of instant writ petition is that said School desires to upgrade itself from Nursery and Primary School to Middle School, said School submitted an application and the same came to be returned by the third respondent vide 'proceedings signed on 03.09.2019 bearing Reference Na.Ka.No.3686/A2/2009' (hereinafter referred to as 'impugned order' for the sake of brevity, clarity and convenience). To be noted, vide impugned order, third respondent has sought certain details and has also held that the application has to be made in draft form, which have been adumbrated as Point Nos.1 to 10 in the impugned order. There is no difficulty about Point Nos.2 to 10, as the writ petitioner submits that they will resubmit the application form after complying with Point Nos.2 to 10. Issue is only regarding Point No.1, which reads as follows: