LexStreak
Read free →
Madras High Court· 17 September 2026

Is a writ petition under Article 226 maintainable against a private matriculation school?

Union Christian Matriculation v. Meena Rathnasabapathy
WA.912/2024 · 2026:MHC:3863 · WA No. 912 of 2024
Coram: Justice S. M. Subramaniam · Justice Krishnaswamy Govindarajan
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow Art.226 Constitution of India📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

A writ petition under Article 226 is not maintainable against a private matriculation school.

No. A writ petition under Article 226 is not maintainable against a private matriculation school. Even where writ proceedings are not maintainable against a private institution, a suit would lie before the competent civil court, and any aggrieved person is at liberty to approach either the civil court having jurisdiction or the competent authority under the Code for redressal of his grievances.

Headnote

Constitution of India — Art.226 — Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2018 — Writ against a private body — Public function test — Retrenchment — Alternative remedy — Constitution of India — Art.226 — Private matriculation school — Maintainability — Held: A writ petition under Art.226 is not maintainable against a private matriculation school, the aggrieved person being at liberty to approach the civil court or the competent authority under the Code. (¶6, 8) Constitution of India — Art.226 — Public function test — Regulation is not a public duty — Held further: Mere regulation of a private body by a statutory authority does not make it discharge a public duty, and a writ lies against such a body only to enforce a statutory obligation or one of a public nature. (¶7) Labour — Retrenchment — Distinguished from termination — Held further: An order of retrenchment reducing the workforce cannot be equated with an order of termination imposing a penalty, and the procedure prescribed for a penalty has no application to it. Writ appeal allowed. (¶3, 4, 9)

Headnote

You've used your free headnotes this month

The answer above and the Court's own paragraphs stay free. LexStreak's full headnote on this judgment needs an account — a free one opens it again.

Create my free account
In the Court's own words
Paragraph 6This Court is of the considered view that the said reason is unacceptable. Even if the writ proceedings are not maintainable against private institutions and in the present case, matriculation school, a suit would lie before the competent civil Court. Any aggrieved person is at liberty to approach either the Civil Court having jurisdiction or the competent authority under the Code for redressal of his grievances. More so, the first respondent also proceeded on the basis that the order passed by the appellant management has passed an order of termination and in fact, it is not. It is only an order of retrenchment, wherein full and final settlement has already been ensured to the first respondent. Currently, she is aged about 64 years and has already reached the age of superannuation. Therefore, full and final settlement would be the only remedy which can be extended by the Courts or even by the authorities in the event of approaching the Education Department.
Paragraph 8This Court is of the considered view that writ petition against a private matriculation school is not maintainable in view of the legal principles settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India as discussed in the aforementioned paragraphs. In the present case, it is not an order of termination, but an order of retrenchment and the management had already clearly stated in the said order dated 03.05.2021 that full and final settlement will be given to the first respondent at the time of leaving the school.
Acts & Sections
Art.226 Constitution of India

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of Union Christian Matriculation v. Meena Rathnasabapathy — and get the Madras High Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Does mere regulation of a private body by a statutory authority make it discharge a public duty under Article 226?Can an order of retrenchment reducing the workforce be equated with an order of termination imposing a penalty?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Madras High Court. Corrections