{"id":78449,"date":"2006-04-28T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2006-04-27T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006"},"modified":"2019-01-08T05:04:24","modified_gmt":"2019-01-07T23:34:24","slug":"a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006","title":{"rendered":"A.Imam Hussain vs The Joint Director Of School on 28 April, 2006"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Madras High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">A.Imam Hussain vs The Joint Director Of School on 28 April, 2006<\/div>\n<pre>       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\n\nDATED : 28\/04\/2006\n\n\nCORAM:\nTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI\n\n\nW.P.No.8762 of 2005\nand\nW.P.M.P.No.9493 of 2005\n\n\nA.Imam Hussain\t\t... \tPetitioner\n\n\nVs.\n\n\n1.The Joint Director of School\n  Education (Higher Secondary),\n  Directorate of School Education,\n  College Road,\n  Chennai.\n\n2.The Chief Educational Officer\n  Chief Educational Office,\n  Thanjavur.\n\n3.The District Educational Officer,\n  District Educational Office,\n  Thanjavur District,\n  Pattukkottai.\n\n4.M.K.N.Matharasa Trust,\n  Rep. by its Administrator Cum Receiver,\n  Now represented by its Secretary,\n  S.Mohamed Aslam,\n  Khadir Mohideen Boys Higher Secondary\n  School,\n  Adirampattinam,\n  Thanjavur District-614 701.\t\t... Respondents\n\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\nPRAYER\n\n\nWrit Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India\npraying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 4th respondent to\npermit the petitioner to join duty as a Headmaster in the 4th respondent's\nschool pursuant to the orders passed by the 3rd respondent dated 11.04.2005.\n\n\n!For Petitioner   \t...\t\tMr.L.N.Prakasam\n\n\n^For 4th Respondent \t...\t\tMr.V.K.Vijayaragavan\n\t\t\t\t\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n<p>\tHeard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned<br \/>\ncounsel for the respondents.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2. This writ petition is filed for a direction against the fourth<br \/>\nrespondent to permit the petitioner to join duty as Headmaster in the fourth<br \/>\nrespondent school pursuant to the order of the third respondent dated<br \/>\n11.04.2005.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3. The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner was appointed as<br \/>\nHeadmaster in the fourth respondent school which is an aided minority school<br \/>\ngoverned by the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private<br \/>\nSchools(Regulations) Act. Certain charges were framed against him on 17.11.2003<br \/>\nand the petitioner was kept under suspension on 03.12.2003.  After the enquiry a<br \/>\nsecond show cause notice was issued to him on 13.02.2004. The petitioner has<br \/>\nsubmitted his resignation to the fourth respondent on 21.02.2004 which was<br \/>\nreceived by the fourth respondent on 24.02.2004 and on 25.02.2004 resignation<br \/>\nwas accepted.  The petitioner by his letters dated 19.04.2004, 17.05.2004 and<br \/>\n15.07.2004 has intimated the fourth respondent withdrawing his resignation<br \/>\nletter.  According to the petitioner, the second respondent who is the authority<br \/>\nto approve the resignation  has not approved the same.  However, the fourth<br \/>\nrespondent has passed an order on 21.07.2004 not permitting the petitioner to<br \/>\ncontinue as Headmaster which was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.No.909 of<br \/>\n2004. This Court while disposing of the said writ petition by an order dated<br \/>\n01.02.2005 has directed the third respondent- District Educational Officer to<br \/>\ndispose of the resignation letter of the petitioner dated 21.02.2004 which was<br \/>\nforwarded by the fourth respondent by his approval, within 15 days.  The third<br \/>\nrespondent District Educational Officer by his order dated 11.04.2005 has<br \/>\nrefused the approval of the resignation letter of the petitioner dated<br \/>\n21.02.2004. Thereafter, the petitioner has requested the fourth respondent to<br \/>\npermit him to join duty by his letter dated 28.04.2005.  Since the petitioner<br \/>\nhas not permitted to join duty he has filed this present writ petition for a<br \/>\ndirection to the fourth respondent to permit the petitioner to join duty in the<br \/>\nfourth respondent school pursuant to the order of the third respondent dated<br \/>\n11.04.2005.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4. The fourth respondent has filed counter affidavit. While admitting that<br \/>\nearlier this Court directed the third respondent to pass orders and the third<br \/>\nrespondent by an order dated 11.04.2005 has also rejected the resignation, it is<br \/>\ncontended the fourth respondent that inspite of the order passed by this Court<br \/>\nwhich was on 01.02.2005, long after the 15 days granted by this Court the third<br \/>\nrespondent has passed order on 11.04.2005.  It is also the case of the fourth<br \/>\nrespondent that as per the rule 17 A of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private<br \/>\nSchools(Regulations) Rules, since the fourth respondent school happens to be the<br \/>\nhigher secondary school, it is the Chief Educational Officer namely the second<br \/>\nrespondent who is the authority to accept or reject the resignation and<br \/>\ntherefore, the order of the third respondent in rejecting the resignation is not<br \/>\nin accordance with the rules.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5. It is also the further case of the fourth respondent that the<br \/>\nresignation letter dated 21.02.2004 was accepted by the educational agency<br \/>\nthrough the receiver appointed pursuant to the order of the Court, on 24.02.2004<br \/>\nand therefore, there was no withdrawal of the resignation.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6. It is also the case of the fourth respondent that the receiver<br \/>\nappointed to maintain the said fourth respondent school who was the Hon&#8217;ble<br \/>\nJudge of this Court has found that lot of irregularities in the administration<br \/>\nof the school and the special fees and other accounts have not been properly<br \/>\naccounted for.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t7. Mr.L.N.Prakasam, learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that<br \/>\ninasmuch as the order of suspension which was passed against the petitioner on<br \/>\n3.12.2003 can be operated only for a period of 2 months as per Section 22(3)(b)<br \/>\nof the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulations) Act and thereafter it<br \/>\nmay be extended by another two months by the educational authorities and after<br \/>\nthe expiry of the four months period, the teacher of the private school is<br \/>\ndeemed to have been automatically reinstated.  In the present case, when the<br \/>\nsuspension was on 03.12.2003 and admittedly no final order has been passed based<br \/>\non the charge memo dated 17.11.2003, the petitioner is deemed to have been<br \/>\nreinstated after the lapse of two months from the date of suspension namely<br \/>\n03.12.2003 namely with effect from 02.02.2004, since it is not even the case of<br \/>\nthe fourth respondent that further two months period was extended by the<br \/>\neducational authority as per the Act.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t8. Further it is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that<br \/>\nas per the Rule 17(2)(ii) of the Rules farmed under the Said Act, the petitioner<br \/>\nshall be paid the subsistence allowance every month from the date of suspension<br \/>\nfor not more than two months at half of the rate of pay in addition to the<br \/>\ndearness allowance etc.,.  According to the learned counsel for the petitioner,<br \/>\nthe petitioner was not even paid the subsistence allowance as per the rules.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t9. It is the case of the learned counsel for the petitioner that it was<br \/>\npursuant to the order of this Court passed in W.P.No.909 of 2004 dated<br \/>\n01.02.2005 directing the third respondent to pass orders on the letter of the<br \/>\nresignation of the petitioner dated 21.02.2004, the third respondent has passed<br \/>\norders on 11.04.2005 not accepting the resignation letter.  Since the said order<br \/>\nwas passed pursuant to the order of this Court, the order passed by the third<br \/>\nrespondent is valid in law and therefore, the petitioner is deemed to have not<br \/>\nresigned as the competent authority has rejected the proposal and not approved<br \/>\nthe resignation.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t10. The learned counsel would further contend that even assuming that as<br \/>\nper the Rule 17A(4) of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulations)<br \/>\nRules 1974, since, the fourth respondent school happens to be a higher secondary<br \/>\nschool, the Chief Educational Officer is the competent authority to accept or<br \/>\nreject the resignation letter, admittedly, the Chief Educational Officer, has<br \/>\nnot accorded his approval for relieving the petitioner on the basis of the<br \/>\nresignation letter and therefore, the resignation is not deemed to have been in<br \/>\noperation.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t11. On the other hand, Mr.V.K.Vijayaragavan learned counsel  appearing for<br \/>\nthe fourth respondent would submit that even assuming that this Court on an<br \/>\nearlier occasion in W.P.No.909 of 2004 by an order dated 01.02.2005 has directed<br \/>\nthe third respondent to pass orders on the letter of the resignation of the<br \/>\npetitioner, inasmuch as under Rule 17A(4) of the Rules, it is the Chief<br \/>\nEducational Officer who is the competent authority to accord approval for<br \/>\nresignation, the order of the third respondent dated  11.04.2005 refusing to<br \/>\ngrant approval for the resignation is only to be ignored.  According to the<br \/>\nlearned counsel for the fourth respondent there can be no estoppel against the<br \/>\nstatute. When the statutory rule contemplates only the second respondent to<br \/>\naccord approval for the resignation, the order of the third respondent in<br \/>\nrefusing to accord approval, even if it was passed based on the Court order<br \/>\ncannot make such order as valid.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t12. He has relied upon various judgments to substantiate his contention<br \/>\nthat when once the law directs the particular thing to be done in a particular<br \/>\nmanner or the particular authority to do certain act, that authority alone can<br \/>\ndo in the same manner.  He would rely upon the judgment of the Supreme Court in<br \/>\nHukam Chand Shyam Lal Vs.Union of India and others reported in AIR 1976 SC 789<br \/>\nto show that it is well settled that where the power required to be exercised of<br \/>\na certain authority in a certain way it should be exercised in that manner and<br \/>\nall other modes of purposes are necessarily forbidden.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t13. In addition to the said case, he has also relied upon the judgment of<br \/>\nthe Supreme Court reported in  AIR 1989 (SC) 617.  He has also relied upon some<br \/>\nof the judgments of this Court including the one in B.Chandrasekaran and another<br \/>\nVs.State of Tamil Nadu, by its Secretary and Commissioner (Revenue Department)<br \/>\nand others, reported in 2001 (3) CTC 353 and the judgment reported in 2006-1-<br \/>\nL.W.409 in V.Sarangapani(deceased) and others Vs. The Collector of Thanjavur<br \/>\nDistrict at Thanjavur and another to show that when a statue contemplates a<br \/>\nparticular authority to perform in a particular manner the same has to be done<br \/>\nonly in that manner and the same authority and performance by any other<br \/>\nauthorities is forbidden. He has also submitted that the fourth respondent is a<br \/>\nminority institution and therefore either Section 22(3)(b) or Rule 17A(4) does<br \/>\nnot apply.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t14. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the<br \/>\nlearned counsel for the respondents and perused the entire records.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t15. The fourth respondent school which is governed by the<br \/>\nadministrator\/receiver appointed by this Court headed by the former Judge of<br \/>\nthis Court, is a minority aided institution under the provisions of the Tamil<br \/>\nNadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulations) Act and Rules made thereunder.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t16. Section 22(3) of the said Act which states as follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;(3)(a) No teacher or other person employed in any private school shall be<br \/>\nplaced under suspension, except when an inquiry into the gross misconduct,<br \/>\nwithin the meaning of the Code of Conduct prescribed under sub-section (1) of<br \/>\nSection 21, of such teacher or other person is contemplated.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tb) No such suspension shall remain in force for more than a period of two<br \/>\nmonths from the date of suspension and if such inquiry is not completed within<br \/>\nthat period, such teacher or other person shall, without prejudice to the<br \/>\ninquiry, be deemed to have been restored as teacher or other employee;<br \/>\n\tProvided that the competent authority may, for reasons to be recorded in<br \/>\nwriting, extend the said period of two months, for a further period not<br \/>\nexceeding two months, if in the opinion of such competent authority, the inquiry<br \/>\ncould not be completed within the said period of two months for reasons directly<br \/>\nattributable to such teacher or other person.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t17. Therefore, a teacher working in the aided school can be kept under<br \/>\nsuspension in respect of an enquiry regarding misconduct within the meaning of<br \/>\nCode of Conduct and such suspension will be for a period of two months and if<br \/>\nthe enquiry is not completed within that period the teacher is deemed to have<br \/>\nbeen restored.  In any event only another period of two months can be extended<br \/>\nby the competent authority. In the present case, it is not even the case of the<br \/>\nfourth respondent that the competent authority has extended the period of<br \/>\nsuspension of the petitioner.  Therefore, while admittedly, the petitioner was<br \/>\nsuspended on 03.12.2003 he was deemed to have restored as a teacher in the<br \/>\nfourth respondent school on 02.02.2004.  It is also not the case of the fourth<br \/>\nrespondent that any order has been passed based on the disciplinary enquiry and<br \/>\nin the mean time the petitioner has given a letter of resignation on 21.02.2004<br \/>\nto the fourth respondent.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t18. It is the case of the fourth respondent that the fourth respondent<br \/>\nbeing run receiver appointed by this Court,  has accepted the said resignation<br \/>\nof the petitioner on 24.02.2004 and therefore, the offer of resignation has been<br \/>\naccepted and in such event, there is no question of cancelling or withdrawing<br \/>\nthe said resignation as stated by the petitioner on 19.04.2004, 17.05.2004 and<br \/>\n15.07.2004.  It is in this regard, relevant to point out that Rule 17A of the<br \/>\nTamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulations) Rules of 1974 which states<br \/>\nas follows:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;17A. Educational agencies not to obtain compulsorily resignation letter<br \/>\neither at the time of appointment or subsequently from employees in their<br \/>\nschool.-(1) Whenever a teacher or other person employed in a private school,<br \/>\ntenders his resignation of appointment, he shall inform the fact of his<br \/>\nresignation in writing by registered post with acknowledgment due to the<br \/>\nDistrict Educational Officer, Inspectress of Girls&#8217; School or the Deputy<br \/>\nInspector of schools concerned.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t2)No teacher or other person employed in a private school shall give to<br \/>\nthe educational agencies, at any time, undated or pre-dated resignation letter.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t3)No educational agency shall insist or compel any teacher or other person<br \/>\nemployed in a private school to give, at any time undated or pre-dated<br \/>\nresignation letter.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t4)No teacher or other person employed in a private school shall be<br \/>\nrelieved from service on the strength of resignation letter.  The resignation<br \/>\nletter shall, on receipt, be sent to the Chief Educational Officer concerned in<br \/>\nrespect of teacher and other persons employed in High Schools, Higher Secondary<br \/>\nSchools and Teachers&#8217; Training Institutes and to the District Educational<br \/>\nOfficer concerned in respect of teacher and other person employed  in a Pre-<br \/>\nprimary, Primary and Middle Schools.  The Chief Educational Officer or District<br \/>\nEducational Officer concerned shall, in turn, get the confirmation of the<br \/>\nteacher or other person employed, as the case may be, as to the fact of such<br \/>\nresignation and then accord his approval to relieve the teacher or other person<br \/>\nemployed, as the case may be, from service.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t5)Entries regarding the date of acceptance of resignation of appointment<br \/>\nshall be made by the Secretaryof the School Committee, in the Teachers&#8217; Service<br \/>\nRegisters of the teacher or in the Service Registers of the other persons<br \/>\nemployed in a private school under proper attestation and duly countersigned by<br \/>\nthe District Educational Officer or the Inspectress of Girls&#8217; Schools, as the<br \/>\ncase may be.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t6)No substitue shall be appointed in the place of a teacher or other<br \/>\nperson employed in a private school who has been relieved on the basis of the<br \/>\nresignation letter tendered by him, without obtaining prior approval of the<br \/>\nChief Educational Officer concerned in respect of the teacher and other person<br \/>\nemployed in High Schools, Higher Secondary Schools and Teachers&#8217; Training<br \/>\nInstitutions and the District Educational Officers concerned in respect of<br \/>\nteachers and other persons employed in Pre-primary, Primary and Middle Schools.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t19. A reading of the said Rule shows that any resignation letter tendered<br \/>\nby any teacher employed in an aided school has to be approved by the Educational<br \/>\nauthorities under the Rule.  It is also made very clear that unless and until<br \/>\nthe educational authority contemplated approved the resignation, the teacher<br \/>\ncannot be relieved.  In the present case, while it is admitted that the letter<br \/>\nof resignation was submitted by the petitioner on 21.02.2004 to the fourth<br \/>\nrespondent and the petitioner has subsequently on 19.04.2004 and 17.05.2004 and<br \/>\n15.07.2004 has withdrawn the said letter of resignation, no educational<br \/>\nauthority contemplates under Rule 17A(4) of the Rule has accorded any approval<br \/>\nto the resignation. While this is the admitted position irrespective of the fact<br \/>\nthat the third respondent has refused to grant approval for the resignation, one<br \/>\ncan safely infer that the resignation has not at all has come into effect.  This<br \/>\nis because according to the learned counsel for the fourth respondent, the<br \/>\nauthority contemplated for the purpose of granting approval for resignation in<br \/>\nrespect of higher secondary school is the Chief Educational Officer namely the<br \/>\nsecond respondent whereas in the present case, the third respondent District<br \/>\nEducational Officer has passed orders on 11.04.2005 refusing to grant approval.<br \/>\nTherefore, according to him, the refusal by the third respondent has to be<br \/>\nignored.  Even if it has to be ignored, the fact remains that even the Chief<br \/>\nEducational officer who is the competent authority for the purpose of granting<br \/>\napproval has not infact granted approval for the resignation of the petitioner.<br \/>\nOn the other hand, admittedly this Court has given direction to the third<br \/>\nrespondent clearly holding that unless and until the approval is granted, the<br \/>\nresignation will not come into effect and based on the order the third<br \/>\nrespondent has passed order on 11.04.2005 refusing grant of approval for the<br \/>\nresignation. It cannot be said to be either illegal or unauthorised. It is true<br \/>\nthat by the hierarchy of judgments of the Apex court as well as this Court it<br \/>\nhas been held that when a statute prescribes a particular Act to be done by a<br \/>\nparticular person in a particular way, the same has to be done in accordance<br \/>\nwith the Rules any other act other than the same is forbidden.  It cannot be<br \/>\nconstrued as if this Court while passing the earlier order directing the third<br \/>\nrespondent, has not taken into consideration the Rule 17A of the Rules.  In any<br \/>\nevent, without going into the said controversy as I have stated earlier, the<br \/>\nfact remains that even the competent authority as prescribed under Rule 17A(4)<br \/>\nnamely, the Chief Educational Officer has not even granted any permission for<br \/>\nthe resignation of the petitioner which is an unassailable fact.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t20. In addition to what I have stated earlier that as per the said Section<br \/>\n22(3) (b) of the Act, the petitioner is deemed to have been restored as a<br \/>\nteacher on 2.02.2004, the letter of resignation submitted by the petitioner on<br \/>\n21.02.2004 has not been approved by the competent authority as on date and<br \/>\ntherefore, the acceptance of the resignation by the fourth respondent is of no<br \/>\nlegal consequence, for, such acceptance cannot go against the statutory<br \/>\nprinciples enunciated under Rule 17 A(4) of the Rules which contemplate the<br \/>\napproval before relieving a teacher based on the resignation letter.  This means<br \/>\nthat it is a prior approval which is a condition procedent for the purpose of<br \/>\nrelieving the teacher based on a letter of this resignation. No where, either<br \/>\nunder the Act or rules stated above, the minority school is exempted from the<br \/>\npurview of Section 22(3)(b) of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private School<br \/>\n(Regulations) ACt and Rule 17A(4) of the Rules made thereunder.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t21. In view of said categoric position and looking into any angle, I am of<br \/>\nthe considered view that the petitioner is deemed to continue as the Headmaster<br \/>\nfrom 02.02.2004 and consequently, he is entitled for the monetary and other<br \/>\nbenefits.  As pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even<br \/>\nthe subsistence allowance has not been paid for the period of suspension.  I do<br \/>\nnot think that the fourth respondent can deny the said right to the petitioner<br \/>\nespecially when Rule 17A(2) (II)(v) contemplate such obligation for payment of<br \/>\nsubsistence allowance during the statutory period of suspension.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t22. In view of the reasons stated above and looking into any angle, I am<br \/>\nof the considered view that the writ petition should be allowed.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t23. In the result, the writ petition is allowed and the fourth respondent<br \/>\nis directed to permit the petitioner to join the duty as Headmaster and pay the<br \/>\nsalary to the petitioner from the date of deemed reinstatement as per the<br \/>\nprovisions of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulations) Act and<br \/>\nRules made thereunder apart from the  subsistence allowance. There is no order<br \/>\nas to costs. Consequently, connected W.P.M.P. is closed.\n<\/p>\n<p>sms<\/p>\n<p>To<\/p>\n<p>1.The Joint Director of School<br \/>\n  Education (Higher Secondary),<br \/>\n  Directorate of School Education,<br \/>\n  College Road,<br \/>\n  Chennai.\n<\/p>\n<p>2.The Chief Educational Officer<br \/>\n  Chief Educational Office,<br \/>\n  Thanjavur.\n<\/p>\n<p>3.The District Educational Officer,<br \/>\n  District Educational Office,<br \/>\n  Thanjavur District,<br \/>\n  Pattukkottai.\n<\/p>\n<p>4.M.K.N.Matharasa Trust,<br \/>\n  Rep. by its Administrator Cum Receiver,<br \/>\n  Now represented by its Secretary,<br \/>\n  S.Mohamed Aslam,<br \/>\n  Khadir Mohideen Boys Higher Secondary<br \/>\n  School,<br \/>\n  Adirampattinam,<br \/>\n  Thanjavur District-614 701.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Madras High Court A.Imam Hussain vs The Joint Director Of School on 28 April, 2006 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 28\/04\/2006 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.JYOTHIMANI W.P.No.8762 of 2005 and W.P.M.P.No.9493 of 2005 A.Imam Hussain &#8230; Petitioner Vs. 1.The Joint Director of School Education (Higher Secondary), Directorate of School [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-78449","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>A.Imam Hussain vs The Joint Director Of School on 28 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"A.Imam Hussain vs The Joint Director Of School on 28 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2006-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-01-07T23:34:24+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"17 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"A.Imam Hussain vs The Joint Director Of School on 28 April, 2006\",\"datePublished\":\"2006-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-07T23:34:24+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006\"},\"wordCount\":3171,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006\",\"name\":\"A.Imam Hussain vs The Joint Director Of School on 28 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2006-04-27T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-01-07T23:34:24+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"A.Imam Hussain vs The Joint Director Of School on 28 April, 2006\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"A.Imam Hussain vs The Joint Director Of School on 28 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"A.Imam Hussain vs The Joint Director Of School on 28 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2006-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-01-07T23:34:24+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"17 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"A.Imam Hussain vs The Joint Director Of School on 28 April, 2006","datePublished":"2006-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-07T23:34:24+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006"},"wordCount":3171,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006","name":"A.Imam Hussain vs The Joint Director Of School on 28 April, 2006 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2006-04-27T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2019-01-07T23:34:24+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/a-imam-hussain-vs-the-joint-director-of-school-on-28-april-2006#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"A.Imam Hussain vs The Joint Director Of School on 28 April, 2006"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78449","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=78449"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/78449\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=78449"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=78449"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=78449"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}