REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER TO THE GOVERNMENT OF TAMILNADU I, Miss. M. Kalyani, D/o Mr. Maharajan, aged about 33 years and residing at No.73, Thaikka Street, Satankulam, Thoothukudi District, functioning as Coordinator for Legal Actions in AVE MARIA Association which is a registered body under Societies Registration Act XXI of 1975 (Reg. No. 29/98) do hereby solemnly affirm and state as follows: I am the Petitioner herein and I am well acquainted with the facts and circumstances of this representation. I state that our Association has been functioning mainly for the rights of the employees who are in the minority institutions. Our Association is working for the oppressed and suppressed in the minority institutions. Our Association raises its voice for the uncared and voiceless for the sake of legal rights and justice. The members of our association follow the principle of “INJUSTICE ANYWHERE IS A THREAT TO JUSTICE EVERYWHERE” and “TREAT OTHERS AS YOU WOULD LIKE TO BE TREATED” I state that “THE TUTICORIN DIOCESAN ASSOCIATION” was registered as a Society under Societies Registration Act 1860 (Act XXI of 1860) under S. No. 1 of 1937-38 dated 14.04.1937. Thereafter the said Society started schools. The said society obtained the status of minority right. The said society applied for grants from the government and it has been getting cent per cent grant for the schools. The said society is presently running 224 schools. The schools are in Thoothukudi, Tirunelveli and Kanyakumari Districts. I state that the said Society’s members are catholic priests in nature. They have claimed religious minority. Since they have obtained minority right for the said society in the name and style of its registered name, the name of educational agency for all its schools is inevitably the same. That is, “THE TUTICORIN DIOCESAN ASSOCIATION”. The said management got approval for the minority right through the proceedings of the Director of School Education RC.No. 24541-G3/76 dated 20.11.1976 with reference to the Writ Petition No. 570/1975. The said management has been enjoying a lot of special privileges in the name of minority right. I state that the minority management can establish and administer schools of their own choice as per the Tamilnadu Private Schools Regulation Act 1973. All other conditions are same as applicable to other private schools. The service conditions of the teachers working in all kinds of private schools and in government schools are the same. Since the schools run by the said minority management is getting cent per cent grant from the government they should abide by the rules and regulations of the government. Minority right does not give power to run the schools and treat the teachers as they wish. There are several limitations to their power. If they do not get cent per cent grant from the government, they can form rules as they wish and that too under the rules for private schools, since they get recognition from the government. I state that the said minority management, contrary to the government rules, is misusing the minority right in all the spheres of its administration. It is beyond any one’s imagination. If the teachers raise voice against their illegalities, they are harassed by transfers, suspension, non-sanction of increments & other service benefits or dismissed. The former president of our Association, Mr. Murugesan was dismissed and the present Secretary Mr. S. Peter Raj was also dismissed. The officers of the education department also support them in their illegalities. No one can ask questions. The teachers are afraid of asking their legitimate benefits. Since their illegalities are approved by the education department blindly, the public has lost their faith in government and democracy. The minority managements have become another government inside our democratic country. The minority right has been given to the minorities only to help the minorities. After obtaining minority right the management is using it as a weapon to kill the interest and lives of the teachers and other employees. The said management is involving in illegalities without any fear of law. I state that the government should treat the public equally except in the case of positive discrimination. The members of our Association have collected many documents to show that the said management is involving in illegalities. We have made many representations to the department and government, but in vain. No one bothers about our representations. I would like to mention some of the serious irregularities and illegalities of the management and the negligence of the government in taking action. The illegalities and criminal offences of the management are serious and more than enough for taking serious action and cancellation of the minority right given to this management. If proper action is not taken against the management and the officers who cooperated with them in the illegalities, this will become a scandal to the public of our reputed democracy. I list out the management’s illegalities here below for taking immediate action. I state that our Association has all documents and proofs. I pray for the appointment of a commission to conduct enquiry to know the facts on which basis proper actions can be initiated against the management cancelling the minority right given. I also state that one of our members has already informed the Public Relation Officer of the said management about this representation. Even after acknowledging the information, the management is adamant to correct itself, in spite of several representations. Also there is a website for us. The website has all the documents in PDF files. Anyone can view them in the site. We want to be transparent. The URL is catholicschoolsatrocities.org Anyone can understand what is going on in the administration of the said management. The following are important allegations. 1. Land documents of the schools are not proper – But the officers give recognition to the schools run by this management without any question:- The Educational Agency is “THE TUTICORIN DIOCESAN ASSOCIATION”. The minority right has also been obtained in this name. As per the Tamilnadu Education Rules the schools should have land and school buildings in the name of the educational agency or in the name of institution. And thereafter department should give recognition. If the land and school building is used on lease-base or rent- base, there must be clear registered document to that effect and the lease or rent document also should be registered in the name of the educational agency or institution. The schools should have sufficient land as per the rules in vogue. Contrary to this rule the said management has not registered the land and school building as per the rules and also most of the schools under the said management has no sufficient land for the school activities as per the norms. But all the schools are recognized and they get cent per cent grant from the government. I made representations to the government and department. But no action has been taken so far. The illegalities are continuing. 2. Management swindles money from the salary of employees – No one can refuse to give – No receipt and no account for the money collected:- The said management has been making illegal deductions from the salary of teachers and other employees for years. They take 2% percent of salary for their use. The money is spent for the luxury of the Catholic Bishop and priests. Further, it is strange that a part of the illegally deducted money is spent for the cases which are filed by the teachers against the atrocities of the said management. Until the introduction of ATM system in disbursement of salary for the employees of schools the appellants were openly swindling a part of money from the salary of teachers and other employees under their schools. Thousands of teachers lost a part of salary for years. Mr. S. Peter Raj, the Secretary of AVE MARIA (Association of Veteran Employees of Minority Academic Recognized Institutions of All kind) filed Writ Petition 8014/99 in Madras High Court to stop illegal deductions being made by the said management. The Hon’ble Court in the order passed on 10.04.2003 in the said Writ Petition held as follows. “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 Tamilnadu Private Schools Regulations Act and the Rules thereunder, and other relevant statutory and government orders, of course, after holding an enquiry into the matter.” The fact is that the Government, The Director of School Education, The CEO Thoothukudi and The DEO, Thoothukudi are the respondents in that case. No one of them intervened and the management was scot-free to continue the illegal deductions. Mr.S.Albert, the Craft Instructor (Agriculture) of St. Mary’s Higher Secondary School, Pothakalanvilai, applied for direct payment without deductions. After long struggle he got his salary through bank. But the management took vengeance against him by transferring him with post to a far-away school telling a lie that the school did not have sufficient land for agriculture. Consequently he had to go to the court to save him from the cruel hands of the said management. Since he went to the court and since he asked questions, he was not given promotion in the school while the Tamil Pandit Post and PG Tamil Post became vacant. A candidate from outside was brought discarding his eligibility. In the name of minority right these happened in the school and the department approved the appointments made in spite of several representations. Thus the teachers who did not give a part of salary to the said management were crushed mercilessly to give threat to others. These are happening because the government and department did not take any action against the said management when it erred in the name of minority right. Still the management is making illegal deductions indirectly. No one can ask questions. The superintendent of RC Schools Tuticorin is the owner of the illegally deducted money. He travels to the courts by luxury car and he stays in luxurious hotels in the cities using the swindled money of the poor and meek teachers. The Manager is also using the money for his luxuries. I state that I can prove how they are swindling money from the employees’ salary without knowing that the employees have right to ask. 3. Management is not a corporate body. But the department is treating it as corporate body – A number of representation from AVE MARIA have been thrown to the dustbin:- The management has not obtained any declaration from the government or department or courts to the effect that they are corporate body. For minority right they have documental proof. Like this they must have a document to prove that they are corporate body. The said management cannot show a document for the corporate status. The Director of School Education in his letter O.Mu.No.101077/G2/E3/2007 dated 28.01.2008 clearly confirms that the said management is not a corporate body. He went to the extent of confirming that every school of the management is single unit. The Director of Elementary Education, Chennai, in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.7503/H/08 dated 18.08.2008 confirms that the said management was not declared as corporate body. In the same proceedings it was mentioned that the file for getting such declaration was pending before the government. There is another strange proceedings from the District Elementary Education Officer, Thoothukudi – Na.Ka.No.736/B2/2010 dated 18.03.2010. It states that the said management was not corporate body during the year 2007-08. It means before and after the year 2007-08 this management is corporate body. It is contrary to the statement of the Director of Elementary Education, Chennai. The fact is that the government has not declared the management as corporate body so far. But it is still strange that the management is treated as corporate body by the department. 4. Teachers are illegally transferred. They get approval. – No norms are followed in approving transfers:- While dealing with transfers of teachers the Hon’ble Full Bench of Madras High Court passed an order on 30.04.1998 in W.A. Nos 275 and 1037 of 1989 and W.P Nos. 7193 and 7235 of 1986. Even after the judgment the management has been transferring the teachers without any difficulty. Because the officers are always ready to approve the illegalities of the management. The Full Bench held as follows. In para 16 it is held as follows “The employer has no power to transfer under the statute. Each school by itself is an independent entity or unit or an establishment, in spite of their being controlled by the common management.” In para 18 (vi) it is held as follows “The power of appointment does not include the power of transfer.” In para 18 (ix) it is held as follows “In the absence of any specific statutory power to transfer in the Act or in the Rules or in the Forms, minority institutions have no power, either express or implied or inherent right to transfer vested in the management notwithstanding the fact that the minority schools are not obliged to form school committee. Sec. 19 and Rule 15 would equally apply to minority schools.” In para 29 it is held as follows The schools have been treated as separate units. Recognition and affiliation are given to the school, not to the Management. Separate seniority list is maintained each individual school and admittedly there is no common seniority list. Grant – in – aid is provided to each school as a unit and not the society. In para 31 it is held as follows In view of the observations made above and the findings rendered that there is no minority corporate management recognized by the authorities and the transfer is not an incident of service, the contract does not provide for the minority institutions being affiliated as one as aided cannot transfer the teachers in the different units established and administered by it and it has no inherent power to transfer. In spite of the above judgment, the said management is transferring teachers illegally and the department approves the transfers without hesitation. It is clear that the management is not a corporate body as per the court order. 5. Government accorded ‘transfer power’ to the management without considering the direction of Hon’ble Court – It is contempt of court order:- The said management wanted the teachers to be always under fear. Since the Full Bench order was against their practice, they filed Review Application No. 139/2007 against the Full Bench Order dated 30.04.1998. The Hon’ble Full Bench of Madras High Court passed its order on 12.11.2007. The Hon’ble Court held in para 13 as follows. 13. “The Full bench decision need not be reviewed in its entirety since the Full Bench in answer to the question whether transfer is an incident of service had indeed observed that there may be facts and circumstances where transfer would be an incident or service. Therefore, it is not necessary to review the said judgment, rather, we think that the correct course would be to delink the petitioner’s case, from the batch that was considered by the Full Bench so that the authorities may consider their request on the basis of the documents produced. Accordingly we dispose of the Review Petition by directing the respondent to consider the question whether the petitioners are a corporate management and whether they maintain a common seniority list and whether there has always been transfer of teachers inter-school and on the basis of the answers to the questions a decision shall be taken in accordance with law within a period of four weeks. The review petition is disposed of accordingly.” The Full Bench did not review. Instead, it delinked the petitioner’s case. Accordingly it directed the government and department to consider the transfers, if the management fulfills three conditions. It should be a corporate body It should maintain common seniority list Transfers of teachers inter-school should be in practice The fact is that all the above three conditions were not fulfilled by the management. i) Whether the management is a corporate body? The proceedings of the Director of School Education, Chennai O.Mu.No.101077/G2/E3/2007 dated 28.01.2008 clearly confirms that the said management is not a corporate body. The Director of Elementary Education, Chennai, in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.7503/H/08 dated 18.08.2008 confirms that the said management was not declared as corporate body. The Proceedings of the District Elementary Education Officer, Thoothukudi – Na.Ka.No.736/B2/2010 dated 18.03.2010 states that the said management was not corporate body during the year 2007-08. He did not say about the facts of corporate status of management before and after this year. One management cannot be single management for only one year. He submitted no proof for his statement. This was told to defend the officer who gave approval to the appointment of one Mrs. D.X. Jeritta. ii) Whether the management is maintaining common seniority list? The fact is that the management is not maintaining common seniority list. The Proceedings of the Director of School Education, Chennai O.Mu.No.101077/G2/E3/2007 dated 28.01.2008 confirms that the seniority list for RC schools is not in force. Mr. S. Peter Raj requested the following information from the Superintendent of R.C. Schools, Thoothukudi, under RTI Act 2005 to get the copies of common seniority list. Unfortunately the management said that they do not maintain common seniority list. Information requested:- 2. In the counter affidavit submitted by Rev.Fr.M.G.Victor for the WP.No.8491/2009 it is mentioned in paragraph 7 that a common seniority list is maintained at the Diocesan level according to the cadre from the date of appointments. Further, in the same paragraph it is mentioned that the common seniority list is being updated every year. Please send me the copies of updated common seniority lists from the year 1990-1991 to 2010-2011. Please inform me the charges for making copies of the common seniority lists. I am prepared to send the money immediately. Reply got from the Superintendent of RC Schools, Thoothukudi:- After the school year it will be disposed. Hence the current year list only can be supplied for which Rs 292/- is needed. The petitioner, Mr. S. Peter Raj, immediately sent a DD for Rs 292/- to get at least the current year seniority list. Again Fr. M.G. Victor, the Superintendent of RC Schools, Thoothukudi,wrote as follows:- “I am to state that we are not maintaining any approved seniority list. Further no rule insists the maintaining of seniority list in respect of minority schools. Hence the DD received from you is returned herewith. Kindly acknowledge the receipt of the same. We regret for the inconvenience caused” The management’s letters Ref. No. 2011/146 and Ref. No. 2011/167 are the documents to prove that the management do not maintain common seniority list. Ref. No. 2011/151 confirms that they do not maintain common seniority list. Also the management’s letters Ref.No. 2009/468 and Ref.No.2010/43 are additional proofs for non-maintenance of common seniority list. From the above statements and documents any one could understand that the said management is not maintaining common seniority list. They hid the facts and got transfer power. The Department also supported it. The government should have verified it. But without verifying the matter, the transfer power was given to the management. iii) Whether there has always been transfers of teachers inter-school? There were transfers. But many transfers were challenged before the Hon’ble Court. One of the cases is that one Mrs. Pushpalatha, a Physical Education Teacher was transferred from St. Antony’s Higher Secondary School, Azhagappapuram, to St. Sebastian Middle School, Vembar with effect from 15.02.2000 through the order 12/4-235 dated 12.02.2000. It was challenged by the teacher through WP 3955/2000 in the High Court of Madras. It was stayed on 14.03.2000. The teacher was taken back to the school from where she was transferred by an order CAN/12/4-235 dated 19.06.2000. The management took vengeance against the teacher by non-sanctioning of salary and assignment, a contempt case was filed and finally the Manager apologized before the court in the contempt proceedings No.813/2002. Mrs. Manimehalai and Mrs. Rajathi were transferred from St. Joseph’s Girls Higher Secondary School, Satankulam, Thoothukudi District, to Sacred Heart Primary School, Satankulam, Thoothukudi District and Sacred Heart Higher Secondary School, Satankulam, Thoothukudi District respectively with effect from 02.07.2003. Both transfers were stayed by the Hon’ble Court. Mrs. Jesu Rajakumari was transferred from RC School, Velayuthapuram, Thoothukudi District, to St. Joseph’s Girls Higher Secondary School, Satankulam, Thoothukudi District. This teacher’s services has not been regularized. She has gone to the court for regularization of services. Mrs. S. Lourdu Mary was transferred from Sacred Heart Primary School, Satankulam, Thothukudi District to St. Joseph’s Girls Higher Secondary School, Satankulam, Thoothukudi District to the place of Mrs. Manimehalai who got stay order from the court. But the management allowed both of them to work in the same school in the same single post without passing re-transfer orders. After 62 days Mrs. S. Lourdu Mary’s transfer was cancelled. But the service was not regularized. The management went to the extent of giving tortures to the teacher. Finally the teacher tendered application for VRS with effect from 01.04.2009. That VRS was not approved. To get VRS the teacher approached the court and waited for three years to get pensionary benefits. Thus the transfer of teachers inter-school was not accepted by all the teachers. The teachers who had no voice were suppressed by transfers. Others did not accept the transfers. The inter-school transfers were not an incident in this management. Thus the conditions laid by the Hon’ble Court in the order passed in Review Petition No.139/2007 were not followed by the management when they applied for transfer power from the government. The management sent fabricated and false documents to the then Chief Educational Officer, Thoothukudi, Mr. Bright Xavier, who is Catholic. The management managed to forward the petition for “transfer power” from the CEO’s office. The Director of School Education also recommended the paper and finally the Government, without even considering the representations from AVE MARIA Association and the Court order, gave “transfer power” to the management. The order passed by the respected Secretary Mr. Kuthalingam is liable to be cancelled with immediate effect. The transfers effected after the order should be withdrawn by the management. Also the minority right of the management should be withdrawn for misuse and for cheating the government by false documents and damn lies. The officers who cooperated with the management without verification and without following the court orders should be penalized. The management and the department did not follow the direction of the Hon’ble Court in this case. Wilfully they disobeyed the order. The Secretary of AVE MARIA, Mr. S. Peter Raj sent telegrams and also a representation dated 27.08.2008 to the Secretary of School Education Department requesting him not accord the status of corporate body and transfer power to this management. The Secretary has acknowledged it. We have the CC of the telegram also. In spite of the representations and the conditions laid in the order passed in the review petition, the transfer power was given to the management. It is a clear-cut case for contempt of court order. 6. Illegal transfers effected in the schools in and around Satankulam and illegal approvals to the transfers by bogus leave letters:- 21 transfers were effected through transfer orders on 02.07.2003 in Satankulam area. The teachers obeyed the transfer orders and joined in the respective posts in other schools. AVE MARIA immediately opposed the transfer orders. Instead of revoking the orders immediately, they waited for 62 days. During this period of 62 days (from 02.07.2003 to 01.09.2003), the teachers were allowed to work in the transferred places. Again, the transfer orders were found to be illegal and they were revoked after 62 days. The teachers joined in the schools from where they were transferred. For some teachers they got approval as “mutual tranfers”. The services of other following teachers were regularized by sanctioning leave by established bogus leave letters and documents. The teachers were sanctioned leave in the schools where their name is not available even in the Masters’ Attendance Register. The duty period of the those teachers were converted into leave period. There is no rule for them to do so. It is nothing but criminal offence. The management’s criminal dealings are explained here below. 1. Mrs. Pushpam, the present HM of the SacredHeartPrimary School, Satankulam, was transferred by the Correspondent to the SacredHeartBoysHigherSecondary School, Satankulam and worked there from 02.07.2003 to 01.09.2003 for 62 days. She went to SSA centre on OD on 19.07.2003 and also she availed Casual Leave in the transferred school on 01.09.2003. She was again transferred from the above higher secondary school and joined in the SacredHeartPrimary School, Satankulam, by the transfer order of the same Correspondent. For regularizing the above period the correspondent hid the facts and records of the duty period and converted it as leave period in the Primary School as though she was not relieved from the Primary School. It was approved by the Education Department by backdoor dealing. The management prepared leave letters for the duty period and sanctioned Earned Leave on private affairs from 02.07.2003 to 11.08.2003 (41 days) and Un Earned Leave on private affairs from 12.08.2003 to 01.09.2003 (21 days). Already the leave letters are bogus, since she worked in other school under the same management during this period. Another criminal offence is that she was allowed to avail 2 kinds of on 19.07.2003 and 01.09.2003. The management has misused the minority right. The department also did not raise any questions. The Auditors also did not raise any question. 2. Mrs. Regis Retna Shanthi, PG Asst of Sacred Heart Boys HSS, Satankulam was transferred to St. Joseph’s Girls HSS, Satankulam and worked in the transferred place from 02.07.2003 to 01.09.2003 for 62 days. The Correspondent hid the duty period of the teacher in the latter school and converted the duty period as leave in the former school as though she was not relieved from the former school. It was approved by the department by backdoor dealing. No one can see her name for the above period in the Masters’ Attendance Register during the leave period. The DEO strongly says that she was not relieved from Sacred Heart Higher Secondary School, Satankulam. For her the management prepared bogus records of leave. She was allowed EL for 40 days from 02.07.2003 to 10.08.2003 and Un Earned Leave on Private Affairs for 22 days from 11.08.2003 to 01.09.2003. Here also the duty period of the teacher in one school under the same management has been converted into leave period in another school where she was not even in the Masters’ Attendance Register. The Department has gone to the extent of saying that the teacher was not relieved from Sacred Heart Higher Secondary School, Satankulam. It is a criminal offence of the management misusing its minority right. 3. Mrs. Vimala Florance, Sec. Asst of St. Joseph’s Girls HSS, Satankulam was transferred to SacredHeartBoysPrimary School, Satankulam and worked in the transferred place from 02.07.2003 to 01.09.2003 for 62 days. The Correspondent hid the duty period of the teacher in the latter school and converted the duty period as leave in the former school as though she was not relieved from the former school. It was approved by the department by backdoor dealing. In this case also the management established leave letters for the duty period of the teacher in one school. The fact was hidden. 4. Mrs. Selvin Thanga Mary, Sec. Asst St. Joseph’s Girls HSS, Satankulam, was transferred to R.C.Primary School, Velayuthapuram, and worked in the transferred place from 02.07.2003 to 01.09.2003 for 62 days. The Correspondent hid the duty period of the teacher in the latter school and converted the duty period as leave in the former school as though she was not relieved from the former school. It was approved by the department by backdoor dealing. It is also clear cut criminal offence of the management. 5. Mr. Isac Sathyanesan, Sec. Asst of Sacred Heart Boys HSS, Satankulam was transferred to Sacred Heart Boys Primary School, Satankulam, and worked in the transferred place as HM of the above Primary School from 02.07.2003 to 01.09.2003 for 62 days. The Correspondent hid the duty period of the teacher in the latter school and converted the duty period as leave in the former school as though he was not relieved from the former school. It was approved by the department by backdoor dealing. The management has hidden the facts of his duty period in one school under the same management. This poor obedient teacher has got pension also. 6. Mrs. Manimehalai, Sec. Asst St. Joseph’s Girls HSS, Satankulam, was transferred to SacredHeartBoysPrimary School, Satankulam, w.e.f 02.07.2003. She challenged the transfer and got stay in the court and was retained in the same place. In the mean time Mrs. Lourdu Mary, Sec. Asst of SacredHeartBoysPrimary School, Satankulam, was transferred to St. Joseph’s Girls HSS, Satankulam, to the place of the above Mrs. Manimehalai w.e.f the above date and she was also allowed to work in the school, though there was no vacancy (Mrs Manimehalai was not relieved). Mrs. Lourdu Mary’s transfer order dated 25.06.2003 was cancelled and was again transferred to Sacred Heart Boys Primary School, Satankulam by another order. The Correspondent did not regularize the service of the teacher. She did not get any incremental benefits from 2003. Her requests became fruitless. She was compelled to sign for relief from the primary school on transfer even after the cancellation. In the mean time she gave application for VRS w.e.f 01.04.2009. But the management did not approve the VRS too. She explained that there was no vacancy in St. Joseph’s Girls’ HigherSecondary School, Satankulam, since Mrs. Manimehalai was not relieved. Consequently the affected teacher Mrs. Lourdu Mary filed a Writ Petition in the court of law for the approval of VRS and regularization of service. The court ordered for regularization and approval for VRS. The Correspondent once again sent her service register to the Education Department requesting them to approve the relief for the cancelled transfer though the management is aware that there is no vacancy for the teacher. After a long struggle the teacher was compelled to tender leave application for the above 62 days of duty in another school. Even after getting a favourable order from the court the teacher had to bow before the management for getting livelihood. The teachers are being threatened to bow before the management even in its illegalities. The department has been supporting the management blindly without considering even the basic rules. In the above cases the department should have verified atleast the Masters’ Attendance Register before approving the leave for the teachers. I state that we have got all the documents under RTI Act 2005. The department has not paid least attention to the representation made by me. No action has been taken against the management so far. 7. Appointment of Sr. Mercy Antony Gerard in St. Joseph’s Girls Higher Secondary School, Satankulam – AVE MARIA objected the appointement through many representations – But the management got approval by producing bogus documents:- Sr. Mercy Anthony Gerard was brought to St. Joseph’s Girls Higher Secondary School, Satankulam, to be appointed as Headmistress in the vacancy arose by the superannuation of Miss T. Maria Selvi. While there were many eligible candidates for that post, this candidate was brought from other management and from other district without following any rules and the appointment as HM in St. Joseph Girls’ Higher Secondary School, Satankulam, was approved by the DEO, though the Association AVE MARIA made several representations through letters and telegrams requesting the DEO not to approve the appointment of the said Headmistress Sr. Mercy Anthony Gerard. The Correspondent Fr. Barnabas sent a bogus undertaking (a damn lie) that there was no eligible teacher for holding the post of HM in the said school for obtaining approval from the DEO. The correspondent happens to be a catholic priest. It was true that there were eligible candidates working in that school by that time. The Tamilnadu Private Schools Regulation Act 1974 was not followed. Though the Department was aware of the fact, it bowed before the minority management and said amen to the illegalities. I state that I requested the HM to send the copy of the proposal sent for approval of the said appointment. But the HM plainly lied that it was not with her and it was with one Mr. Barnabas who was not connected to this school by the time when the lie was told by Rev. Sr. Mercy Anthony Gerard. The HM told this lie in the presence of the Commissioner for RTI on 23.11.2012. The appointment was approved by the DEO without following any rule of the government. Minorities can establish and administer schools as per the minority right. But the minority right does not empower them to tell damn lies. It is strange that this HM is a catholic nun. The public thinks that the nuns are saints like Mother Theresa. The government has not taken any action against this illegal transfer. She is going to retire. She has already applied for pension. A number of telegrams and the representations sent to the department and government are sleeping in the shelves of the Association AVE MARIA. Proper action should be taken against this illegality without delay. 8. The Management tells lies before the court:- Our Association filed Writ Petition 8014/1999 for stopping its illegal deduction from the teachers’ salary. The deductions are many. The management lied before the court that they were deduction only 0.5% from the salary and also they spend the money for seminars and deceased teachers. It is a damn lie. The percentage is 2% and they do not spend the money for teachers or for their welfare. In the Writ Petition No. 8491/2009 by our Association the Catholic Father M.G.Victor with the consent and on behalf of The Catholic Bishop Yvon Ambroise submitted the counter affidavit with full of lies. They are “A common seniority list is maintained at the Diocesan level according to the cadre, from the date of their appointments. The common seniority list is being updated every year” “All the transfers and the reasons are highly transparent and are decided by the Diocesan Education Board.” “Their promotions are based on seniority and merits, as permissible for the minority institutions. There is no change of seniority, because of any transfer. Even if a teacher joins a school at a later point of time, than his juniors in service in the same school, he/she may not lose the seniority at the diocesan level.” “There is no necessity to get the common seniority list of the minority management to be approved by the government as claimed by the petitioner, because of the right of the minority institution under Act 30(1) of the constitution of India and the authorities are always empowered to scrutinize the same”. “Transfer is necessitated for the purpose of selection and appointment to promotional posts, drawing from the merits available under the common pool of the management. Otherwise, it will constrict the liberty of the management to draw only from one school for the promotional posts.” “I humbly submit that the 7th respondent (Bishop Yvon Ambroise Management) diocese is reputed for transparency and accountability” The management was able get a judgment on their behalf by false representations before the court. In the order passed by the Hon’ble Court in WP 8491/2009 dated 03.12.2010 reported in Madras Law Journal (2011) 1 MLJ 1110 in para 22 it is clearly said that the management maintains a seniority in the Diocese level. But the copy of seniority list was not given to Mr. S. Peter Raj under RTI Act 2005. The management asked him to send DD for 292/- for supplying the current year’s common seniority list. Immediately he sent the money. Unfortunately the management returned the DD stating that the said management do not maintain such list. The letters of the management – Ref. No. 2011/146 and Ref. No. 2011/167 are the proofs for telling lies. The Manager of R.C. Schools, The Bishop Yvon Ambroise is the head of the Diocese. The same Association namely “THE TUTICORIN DIOCESAN ASSOCIATION” had obtained FCRA number from Home Ministry of India to receive foreign remittances. Since the Bishop went against the interest of the Government, the account was frozen on many allegations. The Bishop the Manager of RC Schools went to the court to get stay order. In the affidavit of the case his procurator has told lies before the court that the association has been working for 450 years. But the fact is that the FCRA was obtained from the government for the association started in 1937-38. The information is available in the following site news.outlookindia/items.aspx?artid=765028 It is very casual for the management to tell lies even before the Hon’ble Court. 9. Illegal appointment orders issued by the Manager Bishop Yvon Ambroise:- The Manager Bishop Yvon Ambroise appointed Mr. Arul Anand in Satankulam Sacred Heart Primary School. He purposely hid the fact that the place became vacant due to the deployment of one Mrs. Vijitha. The illegal order was given to the candidate as if the place was vacant due to transfer. He was very clever to get approval for his illegal appointment also. The department gave its grand approval for the illegal appointment and released salary. Later it was found to be a criminal offence. No action was taken against the Manager Bishop Yvon Ambrosie. It gives an impression to the public that the Manager of the minority schools can commit any mistake and escape without any punishment. He has hidden many facts, told many lies, committed many mistakes, swindled money from the poor teachers and involved in many illegalities. But he is living a scot-free life without any punishment. He is also a common person before law. The manager has punished the teacher Mr. S. Peter Raj for coughing. Imagine – how much punishment should be given to this person. 10. Cooperative or thrift Fund Society:- There are 2 cooperatives or thrift fund societies under the control of the management. One is in Thoothukudi and the other is in vallioor. They are for the teachers. But the key person is the management. The Superintendent of RC Schools is the head of the 2 organizations. They get a lot of interest from the loans. The accounts are not genuine. Government does not intervene in the activities of the 2 organizations. Teachers society and teachers fund should b managed by the teachers. But here also the management has used its power to make documents on their behalf to keep the teachers under threat and control. 11. Playgrounds of the schools under this management – the departmental officers have not verified the documents so far. But they recommend for recognition and posts:- Many schools under this management do not have sufficient playgrounds. Some schools are showing the same playground for many schools for recognition. Some schools are having playgrounds in other villages far from the school. They do not use the playgrounds. For records sake they are shown in the proposal for recognition. The playgrounds are not in the name of the management or institution. It is in some other names. They are not registered properly. The department does not care about the norms of playground for the schools. They give recognition very regularly even after my representations. Minority right of this management does not mean that they can show any land for the purpose of the school. The department should take action as they do with other schools. We can show that the schools under this management are cheating the government in the name of their minority right. 12. False documents sent by the management to take vengeance:- False records were sent to the Director of School Education about the craft instructor’s post in Pothakalanvilai St. Mary’s Higher Secondary School. The Correspondent of this school wanted to send Mr. S. Albert, the craft instructor, out of the school, since he wanted his salary without illegal deduction and since he requested promotion on the basis of seniority in the particular school. The school has land and water. But the correspondent of the school wrote to the Director of School Education stating that there was no water and land for the craft instructor and so he was not needed to school. The Correspondent expressed option that Mr. S. Albert, the craft instructor, could be sent to other school with his post. The Director agreed and recommended for sending him out. Thus, without verification, the Correspondent managed to get an order from the Director of School Education, Chennai, to send him to AMA School at Sawyerpuram. On that basis the management passed an order to send Mr. S. Albert out and issued relieving order without having concern over the poor teacher. Fortunately the teacher got an interim stay. There is no land in Sacred Heart Higher Secondary School, Satankulam. There is also a teacher working as craft instructor for agriculture. Here the department says amen to the management though there is no land and it is releasing salary regularly. 13. Department says it has no power to take action against minority management:- Several representations were sent to the Department to take action against the management for its illegalities. The department says that they have no power to take action against the management. The District Educational Officer, Thoothukudi, has stated that he has no power to take action on the minority schools management without stating the name of the authority to whom the representation should be made for proper action. The following are the letters in which he states that he has no power to take action on the minority schools. Na.Ka.No. 9208/B2/12 dated 24.12.2012 Na.Ka.No. 386/B2/13 dated 22.01.2013 Na.Ka.No. 72/B2/13 dated 22.02.2013 Na.Ka.No. 1148/B2/13 dated 12.03.2013 The best example is that the Chief Educational Officer, Thoothukudi, instructed the District Educational Officer, Thoothukudi, to take action against the said management on my petition dated 21.06.2012 through his proceedings A. Thi. Mu. 2963/A2/2012 dated 03.07.2012. The District Educational Officer, Thoothukudi, did not care about the proceedings. Since the appropriate action would affect the education department and the management, no action was taken. I sent reminders through telegrams to the District Educational Officer, Thoothukudi, on 25.07.2012, 30.07.2012, 06.08.2012, 21.08.2012, 22.08.2012 and 05.09.2012. Even then the District Educational Officer, Thoothukudi, did not care about my petition and totally negligent of duties. Likewise the same petition was sent to the Hon’ble CM and she directed the Director of School Education to take action against the management. The Director instructed the CEO, Thoothukudi to take action. Finally on the day of retirement the CEO Mr. Ramachandran sent a letter to me that he had no power to take action against the erring management. 14. No punishment was given to the person who stole money:- In 1993-1994 the Clerk Mr. Anthony Jeyaraj, St. Mary’s Higher Secondary School, Pothakalanviali, stole some money from the salary of teachers in the school. The teachers made representation to the management to take action against him. An amount of Rs 112/- has not been disbursed properly to Mr. S. Peter Raj. No action was taken so far. But the person, Mr. S. Peter Raj, who found the theft was punished by dismissal. The department ought to have taken action against the clerk. Instead, the department told that the amount was properly disbursed. The present and former HM of the school confirmed the theft. No action was taken against this clerk till date. The Manager of RC Schools, Tuticorin, has gone to the extent of giving award as the best clerk. We cannot arrive at justice for 20 years. The minority management favours the thieves because they are also swindling money from the teachers. Mr. S. Peter Raj sent a representation on 03.07.2013 to the Correspondent of St. Mary’s Higher Secondary School, Pothakalanvilai, to take action on this criminal issue. He also replied that he would take action in due course. Unfortunately no action has been taken so far. The clerk Mr. Anthony Jeyaraj of the school is still scot-free to do anything. Even in the audits the problem was not exposed. 15. Hon’ble Chief Minister’s order not honoured:- The Director of School Education, Chennai, in his letter Na.Ka.No. 010954/R1/C4/2012 dated 26.11.2012 instructed the Chief Educational Officer, Thoothukudi, to take action on the petitions received from the Chief Minister (F278922/12 and F278939/12). Instead of taking action against the management he in his letter Na.Ka.No. 7955/A5/2011 dated 31.12.2012 has stated that he has no power to take action against the erring minority schools. The Director of School Education, Chennai, had already sent a circular Na.Ka.No. 61975/V1/C1/2007 dated 09.08.2007 to all CEOs of Tamilnadu including to the Chief Educational Officer, Thoothukudi, to correct the managements properly when they err. This circular was sent because the Correspondent of St. Mary’s Higher Secondary School, Pothakalanvilai, did not sanction annual increments to Mr. S. Albert for 7 years. The CEO, Thoothukudi, does not care about the orders of the higher authority namely The Director of School Education, Chennai. It is a clear cut proof for the support being given to the management. Even the Chief Minister’s orders are not honoured. 16. Department does not take action on my petition:- I state that I sent a detailed representation dated 21.06.2012 to the Chief Educational Officer, Thoothukudi. I mentioned several illegalities of the said management and requested him to take action. He received the representation on 23.06.2012. I sent 2 telegrams dated 23.06.2012 and 28.06.2012 respectively to take action on the above petition. After that he instructed the DEO, Tuticorin through Athi.Mu.No. 2963/A2/2012 dated 03.07.2012 to take action and send report to me. But no action was taken. I sent telegrams to the CEO dated 25.12.2012, 30.07.2012, 06.08.2012, 21.08.2012, 22.08.2012 and 05.09.2012 to take action on the petition dated 21.06.2012. No action has been taken so far. He did not care about the instructions given to the subordinate officer. I have all certified copies of the telegrams. I spent thousands of rupees to get justice. It is a pity that no one has taken action against the management. 17. Even the Secretary to Government does not take action against the management:- I sent a detailed representation dated 13.06.2012 to the Secretary for Schooll Education to take action against the Tuticorin RC Schools Management for involving in several illegalities. He received the representation. We received his acknowledgement card on 30.06.2012. I sent reminder to him to take action on the Tuticorin RC Schools Management for the serious illegalities mentioned in the above representation. No action has been taken so far. I sent legal notice on 13.05.2013. Even after receiving it the Secretary has not taken any action against the management. 18. Detailed representation to the Director of School Education, Chennai, on18.01.2013 – No action has been taken so far:- I state that I sent a detailed representation to the Director of School Education on 18.01.2013 with all necessary documents weighing 120 grams. I spent postage of Rs 50/- for this. I requested him to conduct an enquiry on my petition and take action. I also requested in the same petition that the Director of School Education can tell in one line if he cannot take action like the subordinate officers so that I could approach the court for getting justice. Even after 6 months there is no reply or action from him. The serious matters are shelved and the public is disappointed. Hence proper action is needed to save the name of the government and the interest of the public. 19. Legal notices to the Government, Department and the Management became fruitless:- I state that I have sent a lot of representations and also the AVE MARIA has been trying to correct the management out of public interest. But the officers have not shown least attention. Finally I state that I sent Legal notices to the government, department and also the representatives of the management on 13.05.2013 and 17.05.2013. Though they are in receipt of the notices, no action has been taken against the said management so far. 20. Department’s quick and stern action is lacking:- The said management is boasting that they are minority. They do not know the limitations. The Department also do not know the limitations. Hence the department supports blindly. If the department had taken quick and stern action against this erring management, it would not have gone to this extent. And also the persons who are affected by the wrong orders of this management will not suffer for many years. For example Mr. Anthony Chandra Bose of Sokkankudieruppu got his compensation after 22 years of struggle. The Bishop, the Manager, gave Rs 700000.00 through the DD 360907 dated 18.04.2013. Delayed action is the result of many problems. In Pothakalanvilai St. Mary’s Higher Secondary School, Mrs. Innocent Jubilee is suffering without salary for 13 years. This is because the department did not take action in time. Mr. Albert and Mrs. Innocent Jubilee were allowed to handle in PG Post and in B.T Post for nearly 17 months. They proved their mettle in teaching and got certificates of merit from the department. Even after that the management brought another person from outside and got approval from the department for the PG Tami Post. The poor teacher is still suffering. This was done by the local Correspondent and the Manager without heart. AVE MARIA sent letters and telegrams on 22.12.2009 to the officers requesting them not to approve the appointment of other teacher in the post. AVE MARIA Secretary Mr. S. Peter Raj personally met the DEO in the office and explained the situation. Even then the DEO approved the appointment. The department is always encouraging the management in erring. PETITIONER’S PRAYER From the above points anyone can understand the atrocities and illegalities of the management. I state that all our representations have become useless. No action has been taken so far against management even after giving solid proof for the illegalities. The minority right is only for “use” and not for “misuse”. The teachers are not to be hired and fired. Justice delayed is justice denied. Several petitions sent by AVE MARIA and its team members have become fruitless. If this situation is permitted to continue any one will involve in such illegalities in the name of minority right. The AVE MARIA Association has published all the illegalities with proofs in its website catholicschoolsatrocities.org. Therefore, under these circumstances, I pray the Tamilnadu Government may be pleased to appoint a commission to conduct thorough enquiry into the allegations mentioned above and on the findings of the enquiry the minority right given to this management may be cancelled for misuse, violations and criminal offences. Further it is prayed that appropriate punishment may be given to the persons who erred. I state that AVE MARIA has sufficient proofs for taking such actions against the management. Since it is a serious matter, the government may take action at once. I regret to state that our Association will be forced to approach the court of law, if immediate and proper action is not taken. Signed by, M. Kalyani, Petitioner
Posted on: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 03:01:33 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015