Madras High Court Imposes Rs 25000 Cost On Lawyer For Challenging Private School's Vacation Classes

"Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed with costs of Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand Only), payable to the Corporation Girls Higher Secondary School, Meenakshipuram, Tirunelveli, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The said amount shall be used either for construction of a Toilet or for purchasing a Napkin Vending Machine. No Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed."

Finding that the petitioner S Periyaraja was not an aggrieved person, the bench of Justice M Dhandapani and Justice R Vijayakumar noted that the petition had been filed specifically against a particular school when there were several other schools that were conducting special classes all over Tamil Nadu. The court also noted how several coaching centers were also conducting classes for 12th-standard students to train them for competitive exams like NEET, JEE, CLAT, etc.

"The petitioner being an advocate is not an aggrieved person by the conduct of special classes by the seventh respondent school. Further, there are several schools conducting special classes all over the Tamil Nadu. However, the petitioner has filed this writ petition only targeting the seventh respondent school. Therefore, it is clear that it is not a Public Interest Litigation… Hence, the present writ petition is a motivated one. In view of the above, we are satisfied that this writ petition deserves to be dismissed with costs."

Periyaraja had claimed that the respondent school was conducting physical classes unethically for students during the month of May. Contending that vacations are meant for enjoyment and stress relief, he further submitted that students were forced to come to the school and attend special classes. He thus submitted that students would not be able to maintain their mental stability if special classes are allowed to continue.

The court however noted that the special classes were being conducted with the consent of the parents and it is the parents who have to decide whether their child will attend special classes or not. Thus, the court was not inclined to allow the prayer and ordered accordingly.

Case Title: S.Periyaraja v. The Principal Secretary and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Mad) 141

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr.B.N.Raja Mohamed

Counsel for the Respondents: Mr.K.S.Selvaganesan, Additional Government Pleader