Court Order against Illegal Deductions


Catholic Schools Management of Tuticorin Diocese has many schools under their control. They have different levels of administration.

1. Manager

2. Superintendent of R.C. Schools

3. Correspondents

The correspondents are claiming salary for the teachers from the govrenment for every month. They cleverly ask the department to send the salary of all schools to the Manager. A big money goes to the account of the Manager/Superintendent of R.C.Schools, Tuticorin, every month. They take a portion of the amount for them in the name of ‘cess’ or ‘service charges’ or deduction for ‘this’ or ‘that’ which are all illegal. Then they send the remaining money to the correspondents (priests) in the vilalges. They swindle some money for them. Then they give the remaining money to the poor employees. They cleverly get the signatures of employees for the money they swindle from the poor employees. This practice is totally illegal. We made many representations. The response from them are some memos of threats, suspension, dismissal etc., Finally we took the matter to the court and the court clearly says that it is illegal. But they cannot be corrected. Still the illegal deductions continue. We give below the copy of the order.

DATED : 10.04.2003


W.P.No.  8014 of 1999

Association of Veteran Employees
of Minority Academic Recognised
Institutions of All kind
rep. by its secretary
Peter Raj                                                                             Petitioner


1. The Director of School Education
D. P. I. Compound, Nungambakkam
College Road, Chennai

2. District Educational Officer Tuticorin.

3. District Educational Officer
Cheranmadevi at Tirunelveli

4. District Educational Officer
Kanyakumari (Nangercoil).

5. Most Rev. S. T. Amalanathan
the Bishop of Tuticorin.

6. The Chief Educational Officer

PRAYER: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issue of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus as stated therein.

For petitioner   : Mr. K. Shanmuga Kani

For respondents – 1 to 4 & 6 :  Mr. R. Rajasekaran
Government Advocate

For respondent – 5  : Ms. Thenmozhi
For Mr. S. Mahimai Raj


Heard both sides.

2. The petitioner is an association registered under the provisions of the Societies Registration Act, to take care of the interest of the teachers employed in the minority schools in Tamil Nadu. Complaining that the educational institutions functioning under the managership of the fifth respondent – Bishop are deducting the salary from the individual teachers without any authority of law, the petitioner association represented to the educational authorities, viz., respondents – 2, 3, 4 and 6, to intervene in the matter and to pay the salary to the teachers who are working in the educational institutions under the managership of the fifth respondent, directly. However, the said representation was returned by the sixth respondent by proceedings dated 26.3.1999 holding that the respondent has no jurisdiction to entertain the representation of the petitioners as per the Tamil Nadu Private Schools Regulation Act and the Rules framed therein, which is impugned in the above writ petition. Hence, the petitioner seeks the issue of a writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records of the order dated 26.3.1999 in O. Mu. No. 3184/A5/99 on the file of the Chief Educational Officer, Tuticorin, the sixth respondent, to quash the same and to direct the District Educational Officer to pay the Salary to the teachers of the respondents school directly.

3. Of Course, the above allegation of the petitioner – Association is not supported by the afflictions made by any individual teacher working in any institution under the managership of the fifth respondent. If any teacher has got such grievance, he/ she could make appropriate representation to the educational authorities, and the educational authorities are statutorily obliged to enquire into the matter and to take action against the Management in accordance with law, as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu private Schools Regulation Act. In the absence of any such affliction made by any individual teacher, I do not see any locus stand on the part of the petitioner in filing this writ petition.

4. However, my attention was drawn to the averments made by the fifth respondent in his counter affidavit, admitting the unauthorized deductions made by him in the salary of the teachers, which reads as follows.

7. It is submitted that quite a lot of activities are being carried on by the Diocesan Association for achieving academic excellence in the studies and all round development of the student community. There are regular conferences and refresher courses etc., which are conducted for updating the knowledge of the teachers so as to keep them in the mainstream of education. The Association also interacts with the educational authorities so as to quicken the process of properly extending all the benefits available to the teachers and if need be the Association also legally fights for the cause. The Association also runs on the house monthly magazine namely “Kalvi Chiethi Madal” where by all the Govt. orders, Educational guidelines, the rules and regulations and matters of importance concerning the Schools are brought out. It is submitted that the children of staff who obtain meritorious marks in the S.S.L.C. and plus 2 examinations are given monetary incentives. Further, whenever a teachers (Sic) retires, a farewell function is held by all the staff and the retiring teacher is bestowed with usual gifts apart from a purse of Rs. 10,000/- . If any teacher happens to expire in harness a solarium of Rs. 10,000/- is paid to the family of the deceased person.

8. It is submitted that to mete (Sic) out the above expenses and also to defray the costs of administration of all the Diocesan Schools falling within the jurisdictions the teachers contribute half percent of their salary after the statutory deductions.”

5. I wonder as to under what authority of law, the Management is making such deductions to the tune of half percent of salary after the statutory deductions from each of the teachers, which, in my considered opinion, warrants interference and appropriate action in accordance with law as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools Regulation Act and the Rules framed thereunder, and other relevant statutes and Government Orders, of course, after holding an enquiry into the matter.

6. In view of the above, suffice it to permit the individual teacher to make appropriate representation to the sixth respondent herein, giving the details of deductions made from their salary within thirty days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, as those details are very relevant to hold an enquiry in that regard by the sixth respondent, and on receipt of such representations, the sixth respondent shall hold an enquiry into the afflictions of the individual teacher and pass appropriate order in accordance with law, of course, after giving a fair and reasonable opportunity to the individual teachers, as well as to the Management, expeditiously.
The writ petition as disposed of accordingly. No costs.
Asst. Registrar
//True Copy//
For Sub Asst. Registrar

1. The Director of School Education, D. P. I. Compound, Nungambakkam
College Road, Chennai.
2. District Educational Officer, Tuticorin
3. District Educational Officer, Cheranmadevi at Tirunelveli.
4. District Educational Officer,  Kanyakumari (Nagercoil).
5. The Chief Educational Officer, Tuticorin.
+ 1 CC to Mr. S. Mahimai Raj Advocate on payment of charges. (SR. 22697)”
+ 1 CC to the Govt. Pleader, SR. 72605.
+ 1 CC to Mr. K. Shunmugakani, Advocate on payment of charges. (SR. 22423).

W. P. No. Bo 14 to 1999.

No comments yet. Be the first.

Leave a reply