Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Thangam Vs. The Director, Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai and Others

Thangam vs The Director, Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Chennai Madurai Decided Aug 10, 2016
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1189129

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Chennai Madurai High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
W.P (MD).No. 14588 of 2016
Subject
Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue
Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Thangam

Respondent

The Director, Elementary Education, College Road, Chennai and Others

Excerpt

.....is going to take place from 12.08.2016 to 21.08.2016 and the respondents are also receiving applications through online. he states that the petitioner may be directed to send her application through online and on receipt of the same, the respondents will consider the request of the petitioner, favourably. 3. considered the submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on record. 4. no doubt, the petitioner is eligible to take part in the counselling, however, as per clause no.7 found in g.o.ms.(1d)no.258, school education department, dated 06.07.2016, the respondents are bound to consider the plea of the petitioner. therefore, while directing the petitioner to send her application through online at the earliest, this court in parallel, directs the respondents more particularly, the first respondent, to consider the plight of the petitioner as she lost her husband in the accident in the year 2008 and now, she is left with two children, and pass appropriate orders accommodating her in kanyakumari district, preferably, near gurusadi, kanyakumari district, within a period two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 5. with the above direction, this writ petition stands disposed of.

Full Judgment

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the first respondent to consider the petitioner's representation dated 23.09.2015 submitted for petitioners preferential transfer under destitute widow woman category forthwith from the existing station to anyother station within the District of Kanyakumari forthwith, on merits and in accordance with law.)

1. The petitioner herein, Mrs.Thangam, presently serving as a Secondary Grade Teacher at Panchayat Union Primary School, Kalathoor, Elayankudi Block, Sivagangai District, has come forward with the present Writ Petition, by stating that in the year 2008, her husband passed away due to an accident and that she is left with two children, sought for transfer from the existing station to her native place, namely, Kanyakumari District, through her representation dated 23.09.2015.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per Clause No.7 found in G.O.Ms.(1D)No.258, School Education Department, dated 06.07.2016, those teachers, who lost the spouse after 01.06.2015, can be issued with transfer order to their native place, as a special case. Despite the same, the representation of the petitioner have not been considered, which impelled the petitioner to approach this Court.

3. Mr.Mohammed Mohideen, learned Additional Government Pleader, after getting instructions from the respondents, submitted that the General Counselling is going to take place from 12.08.2016 to 21.08.2016 and the respondents are also receiving applications through online. He states that the petitioner may be directed to send her application through online and on receipt of the same, the respondents will consider the request of the petitioner, favourably.

3. Considered the submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on record.

4. No doubt, the petitioner is eligible to take part in the Counselling, however, as per Clause No.7 found in G.O.Ms.(1D)No.258, School Education Department, dated 06.07.2016, the respondents are bound to consider the plea of the petitioner. Therefore, while directing the petitioner to send her application through online at the earliest, this Court in parallel, directs the respondents more particularly, the first respondent, to consider the plight of the petitioner as she lost her husband in the accident in the year 2008 and now, she is left with two children, and pass appropriate orders accommodating her in Kanyakumari District, preferably, near Gurusadi, Kanyakumari District, within a period two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

5. With the above direction, this Writ Petition stands disposed of.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial