V.S.SIRPURKAR, J. - (1.)This writ appeal is by the Government, against the order of the learned single Judge, allowing the writ petition. That writ petition was filed by the respondent herein viz., K.Periyasamy, claiming to be the representative and the Correspondent of one Lakshmi Narasimha Vidyalaya at Ragavendrapuram in Salem District.
(2.)In that writ petition, an order dated 24.10.1997 came to be challenged. In that order, the District Elementary Education Officer, Salem had held that in view of the Director's proceedings dated 14.10.19 97, further actions were to be taken. It was stated further that since the students strength was below 20 and since the structural stability certificate of the school building was not produced after 18.11.1 993, the Assistant Elementary Educational Officer was to take steps to enrol the present students in the nearby Panchayat Union Elementary School, Selliamman Nagar. Secondly, steps were to be taken to withdraw the teaching posts from this school. Thirdly, the Assistant Elementary Educational Officer was requested to take steps to withdraw the recognition of the school and fourthly, the concerned Assistant Elementary Educational Officers were requested to take steps as per the legal deeds already given by one Thiru.Ragavendra Rao. The concerned Assistant Elementary Educational Officers were requested to implement the above directions and a special report to that effect was directed to be submitted to the District Elementary Educational Officer, Salem. Curiously enough, this order came to be challenged, though it had not actually resulted in the withdrawal of the recognition. However, the petitioner/respondent herein, rushed to the Court perhaps treating the withdrawal of the recognition as a fait accompli.
(3.)This action was because there were inspections taken during which some defects were found, which defects we have already referred to above and which defects surfaced in the impugned order dated 24.10.199 7. The learned single Judge has allowed the writ petition on the singular ground that the inspections were taken and the average attendance was estimated on the basis thereof, in the month of July 1997. According to the learned single Judge, as provided in G.O.Ms.No.250 ( Education) dated 29.2.1964, modified by G.O.Ms.No.1820 (Education) dated 21.11.1984, the inspections have to be carried out and the estimate of the average attendance of the students has to be made on the basis of the attendance only in the month of August and it is only on that basis that the staff strength is to be decided by the authorities. We were taken through the said Government Orders, wherein it is very clearly suggested in paragraph 3 thereof that the teacher strength has to be fixed on the basis of the average attendance during the month of August, meaning thereby that the authorities would have to hold the inspections only in the month of August and on that basis, come to the conclusion as to how many teachers were in reality required for that school. That not having been done, and the inspection having been fixed only on 20.7.1997, the learned single Judge held that the action was per se bad and that the department could not proceed with the proposals in the order dated 24.10.1997.