Madras High Court
WP(MD)/30527/2026 of The Correspondent Vs The State of Tamil Nadu Repr on 27 October 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 27-10-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI
WP(MD) No. 30527 of 2026
& WMP(MD) No. 23350 & 23351 of 2026
CNR:{HCMD011517882026}
The Correspondent,
Nirmala Institute of Technology,
Manalikarai - 629 164,
Kanyakumari District.
..Petitioner(s)
Vs
1. The State of Tamil Nadu
Represented by its Secretary
Department of Employment and Training,
Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director of Employment and Training, Thiru Vi.Ka. Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032.
3. The Regional Joint Director of Training, NGO Colony, Perumalpuram post, Tirunelveli - 627 007.
..Respondent(s)
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent Director of Employment and Training in Na.Ka. No.
43058/Ko.Mu.5/2015 dated 20.08.2026, and the consequent proceeding issued by the 3rd respondent Regional Joint Director of Training in Na.Ka. No. 523/KaiPa/2021 dated 10.09.2026, QUASH THE SAME, and pass such further or other suitable Order / Orders as this Honble Court
may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, and thus render Justice.
For Petitioner(s):
Mr. S.Xavier Rajini
M/s Bavanaash V A
For Respondent(s):
M/s.Dinesh Hari Sudharsan
Additional Government Pleader
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER
This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned proceedings issued by the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.43058/Ko.Mu.5/2015 dated 20.08.2026, and the consequent proceedings issued by the 3rd respondent in Na.Ka.No.523/KaiPa/2021 dated 10.09.2026.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that petitioner institution is one among the numerous educational institutions administered by the Provincial of Tamil Nadu Carmelite, a minority educational institution, which was established in the year 1965. 125 students are studying in the petitioner institution. 12 instructors and 20 non-instructors are working in the petitioner institution. It is an aided institution, where the State Government sanctioned free laptops to the students for the purpose of education. During the academic year 2014– 2015, 41 laptops remained undistributed to the students and were kept in a locked room within the institution. The government thereafter sanctioned another 114 free laptop to the institution during the academic year 2015-2016 and the same were also kept along with 41 laptops for distribution to the students.
3. It was further submitted that unfortunately, on 21.09.2015 at about 11 p.m., unknown persons have taken 11 laptops out of 41 laptops, following which the Principal of the petitioner College had lodged a complaint before the Sub-Inspector of police, Kotticode Police Station, Kanyakumari District, and a case in Crime No.211 of 2015 was also registered. The same culminated in filing a charge sheet in CC No.39 of 2019 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Padmanabhapuram, Kanyakumari District.
4. On 23.01.2026, one among the two accused was acquitted on probation and as far as the accused No.1, this case was closed as abated, since he died on 15.08.2024. Immediately, the petitioner institution sought for return of three laptops by filing a petition before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.I, Padmanabhapuram, Kanyakumari District, in
Crl.MP.No.10905 of 2016 in CC No.39 of 2019, which was recovered during investigation by the police and vide an order dated 24.09.2026, the same was directed to be returned to the petitioner institution.
5. The second and third respondents sought for information regarding the pendency of the case, for which the petitioner had duly intimated the status of the same. Thereafter, the second respondent vide proceedings dated 21.07.2026 issued memo directing the petitioner to remit the amount of 11 laptops in the Government account and the petitioner sought for time for giving full details. The second respondent vide impugned proceedings dated 20.08.2026, further directed the petitioner to remit a sum of Rs.1,81,720/- for the 11 laptops. On 10.08.2026, the petitioner intimated the second respondent regarding the acquittal in the criminal case and the status of return of property. However, in the meanwhile, the third respondent also directed the petitioner to remit a sum of Rs.1,81,720/- in the government account for 11 laptops, and on failure, the said amount would be reduced from the aid, to which the institution is eligible vide impugned proceedings dated 10.09.2026.
6. On 30.09.2026, the petitioner intimated the respondents 1 & 2 regarding the return of three laptops by the Judicial Magistrate No.I, Padmanabhapuram, Kanyakumari District and requested not to take any action for the reason that the police could not trace the remaining laptops. However, the respondents 1 & 2, without heeding to the petitioner’s request, repeatedly continued to direct the petitioner to remit the said sum. Hence, this writ petition came to be filed.
7. The learned Additional Government Pleader submitted that the petitioner, being an institution receiving grant-in-aid from the Government, is vicariously liable for the valuable articles entrusted to it for the benefit of the students. Hence, the petitioner cannot, as a matter of right, seek for modification of the impugned orders, which have been issued pursuant to the theft of 11 laptops from the institution and hence, there is no infirmity in the same and sought for dismissal of this petition.
8. Heard the learned counsel on either side and carefully produced the materials available on record.
9. A careful perusal of the materials available on record would make it clear that the petitioner had already received three laptops, which have been recovered by the police in the process of investigation. However, it seems that the investigation agency had failed to recover 8 laptops sofar. Under such circumstances, the request of the petitioner’s counsel that the respondents 1 and 2 shall be directed not to insist the payment of Rs.1,81,720/- cannot be heeded to.
10. I don’t find any infirmity in the impugned order, since it is the considered opinion of this Court that an educational institution ought to have exercised due diligence in upkeep of the laptops which were distributed by the government in trust for the benefit of the students. Having failed to do so, the petitioner institution cannot seek to avoid its consequences.
11. However, the impugned order is modified to the extent that the petitioner institution shall be liable to account for the remaining eight laptops that have not yet been recovered. The petitioner institution is directed to distribute the three recovered laptops to the students for whose benefit they were supplied. If any of the recovered laptops is found to be in an unworkable condition, the same shall be returned to the Government, which shall arrange for its replacement with a new laptop.
12. Accordingly, this writ petition stands disposed of. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed. 27-10-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No SM To
1. The Secretary Department of Employment and Training, Fort St. George, Chennai - 600 009.
2. The Director of Employment and Training, Thiru Vi.Ka. Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai - 600 032.
3. The Regional Joint Director of Training NGO Colony, Perumalpuram post, Tirunelveli - 627 007.
L.VICTORIA GOWRI, J. SM WP(MD) No. 30527 of 2026 27-10-2026