JUDGMENT
N.K. Jain, Actg. C.J.
1. These writ appeals are filed against the order of the learned single Judge dated 31-8-1998 in W.P. Nos. 7964 and 8812 of 1998, whereby the writ petitions were dismissed.
2. It is alleged that the appellants were the students of the third respondent school is I and III Standards. A Teacher of the third respondent school punished the appellants for not doing the home work. Parents of the appellants took objection to the action of the teacher and reported the matter to the authorities. Subsequently, the teacher was also removed from service. It is also alleged that the parents of the appellants along with a politician again and again created problems to the school authorities. The third respondent/ school by letter dated 25-4-1998 requested the parents of the Appellants to receive the transfer certificates of the appellants. Aggrieved by the same the appellants filed the writ petition.
3. The learned single Judge, on consideration, dismissed both the writ petitions. Hence, these writ appeals.
4. Now, the learned counsel for the appellants submits that the punishment is harsh and denied the allegations stating that the allegations were false and further submitted that they will not involve themselves with the administration of the third respondent/school in future. The learned counsel for the appellants further submits that if in case the transfer certificates were given, it will deprive the future of the students who are in the initial stages of education and it will affect their career.
5. To this the learned counsel for the third respondent/school submits that the school authorities are bound to maintain the standard of the school and they are supposed to ask the students to do their home work and if such type of interference is made by the parents of the appellants along with politicians, it will be very difficult to run the school and keep to their standard and discipline. It is also submitted that it is within the domain of the school and no interference in the administration of the school will be tolerated. Thus, the learned single Judge has rightly dismissed the writ petition.
6. On consideration, we find no error or illegality in the order of the learned single Judge so as to call for any interference . However, the learned counsel for the appellants submits that the parents of the appellants will give an undertaking that they will not interfere with the administration of the school. Accordingly, the fathers of the appellants have filed separate affidavits, stating that they will not interfere themselves in the administration of the school. They also appeared in court today and when asked by the Court, they accept to abide by the undertaking.
7. Under the circumstances, without making a precedent and in the interest of the future of the students and upon the undertaking furnished by the parents of the appellants, we deem it proper to direct the school authorities to take back the students during this academic year itself and permit them to write the ensuipg examinations. It is made clear that this order will not be taken as a precedent in future, in similar matters. The writ appeals are disposed of accordingly. Consequently, C.W. Ps. 14390 and 14391 of 1999 are closed.
