K K RAMESH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have heard the arguments of Mr. R. S. Ramanathan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. V. Rajasekaran, learned Special Government Pleader representing the respondents and Mr. V. Bharathidasan, learned counsel appearing for the third respondent and have perused the records.

(2.) THE prayer of the writ petitioner is to quash the order dated 31. 10. 2006 issued by the first respondent District Elementary Educational officer wherein and by which the petitioner was informed that his request to hand over the service records of the Teachers to him, being the alleged correspondent of the School, is not feasible and it will be considered only after the criminal case registered against him in FIR No. 34 of 2005 dated 21. 3. 2005 registered under Sections 406, 420, 419 and 120 (b) IPC is disposed. The petitioner earlier filed a writ petition being W. P. (MD) No. 2944 of 2006 for the very same prayer. But, however, without expressing any opinion, this Court directed the respondent to dispose of the petitioner's representation dated 20. 02. 2006. It is pursuant to this direction, the present impugned order came to be passed.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petitioner, the School run by him in the name of balarengapuram Middle School at Madurai is a religious minority School entitled to have protection under Article 30 (1) of the Constitution of India. According to him, he is also a teacher in the said school and the other teachers have given a false complaint and because of that, he has been arrested by the police and he is facing a criminal trial. According to the petitioner, as a correspondent, he has to approve and sanction all forms of leave for the staff and that without his knowledge, at the instance of the third respondent, the second respondent had taken over charge of the School. When he demanded his right as a minority, management has to be restored to him. Whenthe same was not done which necessitated him in filing the present writ petition as stated already.