Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 138 To 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 143 NOMINAL INDEX The State of Tamil Nadu and Others v. K Bashiri and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 138 Kunal Kamra v. State, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 139 Dr. R. Mathivanan v. Government of Tamil Nadu & Ors, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 140 South Indian Senguntha Mahajana Sangam v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad)...
Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 138 To 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 143
NOMINAL INDEX
The State of Tamil Nadu and Others v. K Bashiri and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 138
Kunal Kamra v. State, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 139
Dr. R. Mathivanan v. Government of Tamil Nadu & Ors, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 140
South Indian Senguntha Mahajana Sangam v. State of Tamil Nadu, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 141
G Subramania Koushik v. The Principal Secretary and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 142
Chandru and Others v. The Inspector of Police, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 143
REPORT
Case Title: The State of Tamil Nadu and Others v. K Bashiri and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 138
The Madras High Court has held that the Teachers Eligibility Test (TET) qualification is mandatory for all educational institutions, including the minority institutions.
The bench of Justice J Nisha Banu and Justice S Srimathy held that the Government had powers to prescribe the minimum educational qualification for the appointment of teachers and the government had prescribed the TET qualification under such power. Thus, the court held that the qualification was mandatory.
Case Title: Kunal Kamra v. State
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 139
The Madras High Court on Thursday (April 17) has disposed of the transit anticipatory bail petition filed by comedian Kunal Kamra in connection with the FIR lodged against him in Mumbai over his alleged remarks against Maharashtra Deputy CM Eknath Shinde.
Justice Sunder Mohan closed his petition after Kamra's Advocate V Suresh informed the court that the Bombay High Court had granted interim protection from arrest to the comedian on Wednesday while reserving orders in his plea for quashing the FIRs registered against him. In the previous hearing, the Madras high court had extended the interim anticipatory bail granted to him till April 17.
Case Name : Dr. R. Mathivanan v. Government of Tamil Nadu & Ors
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 140
A Division bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Justice G. Jayachandran and Justice R. Poornima held that the re-employment of faculty retiring mid-academic year is mandatory, but if there are pending disciplinary proceedings and further the 'no work, no pay' principle applies, then the re-employment is not allowed.
It was observed by the court that it is mandatory to re-employ a teaching faculty who retire in the middle of the Academic year till the end of the said academic year. It was observed by the court that the College Management refusal to engage the appellant citing disciplinary proceedings was bad in law. Further, during the period there are evidence to show that the appellant was engaged by the University for examination work. The appellant was ordered to be re-employed up to May 31st, 2014 in the proceedings of the Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Madurai, dated 16.04.2014. Therefore, the single Judge should not have dismissed the appellant's writ seeking salary for the period, he worked.
It was further observed by the court that the contention of the appellant was not sustainable as there was no record to show that the Management re-employed the appellant after he attained superannuation. The records relied by the appellant were self-serving documents or letter from the University which had sought his assistance as Examiner. It was observed by the court that on the date of superannuation, the appellant was facing disciplinary proceedings.
Case Title: South Indian Senguntha Mahajana Sangam v. State of Tamil Nadu
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 141
The Madras High Court has asked the Inspector General of Registration to ensure that no society is registered with a caste name or for the purpose of perpetuating caste in the State.
Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy added that if such societies are running schools, colleges, or other educational institution, it should be ensured that the institution does not display caste names either directly or indirectly. The court said that the caste names should be removed within 4 weeks and the names should be changed. The court added that if the institutions failed to comply with the orders, steps would be taken to de-recognise the institution and the students would be transferred to other recognised institutions. The court added that the same action could be taken with respect to educational institutions run by trusts or other individuals.
The court also asked the State government to remove any prefixes associated with caste from the school names, referring to them only as Government schools, followed by their location. The court said that if the donor's name is to be mentioned in the school's or hostel's name, the caste prefix or suffix will have to be removed.
Madras High Court Bans 28 Plastic Items In Kodaikanal And Nilgiris
Case Title: G Subramania Koushik v. The Principal Secretary and Others
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 142
The Madras High Court has banned the manufacture, storage, supply, transport, sale, and distribution of 28 items of plastic throughout the Western Ghats, sanctuaries, and tiger reserves, starting from the Nilgiris up to the Agathiyar Biosphere in Kanyakumari District, which includes the Nilgiris and Kodaikanal hill areas.
The forest bench of Justice N Satish Kumar and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy has banned the items. Prohibiting the transport of the plastic items to the area, the court also asked the state government to issue notification under Section 67(3) [Power of State Government to control road transport] and to add a condition to the permit mandating that no vehicles shall be used for transport or distribution of banned items along the Western Ghats and sanctuaries. The court added that vehicles found transporting the banned items should be detained and action be initiated against the persons.
The court also suggested that the shop owners, vendors and other persons involved in the distribution of consumables packed in non-biodegradable packaging should open the packets, transfer the contents to biodegradable paper covers or may use natural products like leaf products, kora grass products, earthen products etc.
Case Title: Chandru and Others v. The Inspector of Police
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 143
The Madras High Court has recommended the formation of a Special Committee with statesmen, scholars, psychoanalysts, and representatives from the Departments of Human Resource Development, Higher Education, School Education, and Police to identify and address behavioral issues among youngsters.
Justice AD Jagadish Chandira said that the issue required urgent intervention by Educational authorities. The court added that there was a need for long-term solutions starting from schools with regular parent teacher meeting and studies.
OTHER DEVELOPMENTS
ED Conducting Roving Inquiry Because Of Upcoming Elections: TASMAC To Madras High Court
Case Title: Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation Ltd TASMAC v. Directorate of Enforcement
Case No: WP 10348/ 2025
The Tamil Nadu State Marketing Corporation, on Tuesday, argued that the Enforcement Directorate's recent searches were in connection with the upcoming Tamil Nadu Elections as it wanted to tarnish the image of people involved in the election.
Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, appearing for TASMAC was making submissions before the bench of Justice SM Subramaniam and Justice K Rajasekaran.
“I'll tell you how the ED works. The Tamil Nadu election is next year. So they'll start this year. Look up old FIRs and start roving and fishing inquiry. They are taking up matters to some kind of result to tarnish the image of people involved in the Election. Why are they suddenly dreaming that the Tamil Nadu excise department is corrupt?” Singh argued.
A lawyer has approached the Madras High Court to remove and disqualify Tamil Nadu Minister for Forests K Ponmudi for allegedly making derogatory speech against Saivism, Vaishnavism and women in general.
Advocate B Jaganath has filed the plea to declare that the recent speech made by Ponmudi as ultra vires and patently violative of Article 188, Article 99 of the Constitution and the oath of office of the Minister.
Calling it the most grotesque, shameful, and derogatory statement made by a sitting Caninet Minister, Jagannath said that the act deserved strongest and harshest punishment. He also informed the court that he had filed a police complaint in this regard, and also written to the Chief Minister to immediately remove Ponmudi from all constitutional posts.
The Madras High Court has asked the Tamil Nadu government to register an FIR against Minister for Forests K Ponmudi for his recent remarks in connection with Saivism and Vaishnavism.
Justice Anand Venkatesh warned the State that it would take suo motu action against the Minister if the State was not willing to register the FIR.
"If they don't, then I'll initiate suo motu," the judge told Advocate General PS Raman on Thursday.
The court also said that the matter did not require much enquiry as the person who made the comments, Ponmudi, had already accepted the statement made. The court also suggested that the comment did not seem to be made in the spur of the moment and Ponmudi seemed to have made the speech with full consciousness. The judge also remarked that the entire issue could not be brushed aside by mere public apology.