Case Note & Summary
The case involves a writ appeal filed by the Dean of JKKN Dental College and Hospital against an order of a learned Single Judge in W.P.No.49758 of 2025. The first respondent, a student, had filed the writ petition seeking to declare clause (6) of the agreement bond dated 11.09.2023 as null and void, as he discontinued the course. The learned Single Judge rejected the main prayer but directed the college to return the student's certificates/documents within one week without waiting for a certified copy. The appellant college challenged this direction, arguing that once the main relief was rejected, the college was entitled to recover the sum due as arrears of land revenue, and the direction to return certificates was beyond the scope of the writ petition. The Division Bench, comprising the Chief Justice and Justice G.Arul Murugan, allowed the appeal, setting aside the direction to return certificates, while upholding the rejection of the main prayer and the recovery of the bond amount as arrears of land revenue.
Headnote
A) Educational Law - Bond Agreement - Recovery of Sum - The appellant college challenged the direction to return original certificates without payment of the bond amount. The Division Bench held that once the main relief to declare the bond clause as void was rejected, the college was entitled to recover the sum as arrears of land revenue, and the direction to return certificates without payment was beyond the scope of the writ petition and could not be sustained. (Paras 6-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the learned Single Judge could direct the return of original certificates of the student without insisting on payment of the bond amount, when the main prayer to declare the bond clause as void was rejected.
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The direction contained in paragraph 8(ii) of the order dated 9.3.2026 in W.P.No.49758 of 2025 is set aside. The rest of the order is upheld. No costs. Consequently, C.M.P.No.8351 of 2026 is closed.
Law Points
- Bond agreement
- recovery of sum
- return of certificates
- interim direction
- scope of relief
Case Details
W.A.No.797 of 2026 and C.M.P.No.8351 of 2026
Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari, Chief Justice, G.Arul Murugan, J.
Mr.N.Manoharan for appellant, Ms.B.N.Sinega for R1, Mrs.M.Sneha for R2 and R3, Mr. Hari Radhakrishnan for R4
The Dean, JKKN Dental College and Hospital
M.Meena Vignesh, The State of Tamil Nadu, The Director of Medical Education, The Registrar of Tamil Nadu Dr.MGR Medical University
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ appeal against an order of a learned Single Judge in a writ petition challenging a bond clause.
Remedy Sought
The appellant college sought to set aside the direction to return original certificates without payment of the bond amount.
Filing Reason
The learned Single Judge directed return of certificates despite rejecting the main prayer to declare the bond clause as void.
Previous Decisions
The learned Single Judge in W.P.No.49758 of 2025 dated 9.3.2026 rejected the prayer to declare clause (6) of the bond as illegal but directed return of certificates within one week.
Issues
Whether the learned Single Judge could direct return of original certificates without insisting on payment of the bond amount when the main relief was rejected.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellant argued that once the main relief was rejected, the college was entitled to recover the sum as arrears of land revenue, and the direction to return certificates was beyond the scope of the writ petition.
Respondent student argued for return of certificates.
Ratio Decidendi
When the main relief to declare a bond clause as void is rejected, the college is entitled to recover the sum due as arrears of land revenue, and a direction to return original certificates without payment of the bond amount is beyond the scope of the writ petition and cannot be sustained.
Judgment Excerpts
Challenging the order of the learned Single Judge dated 9.3.2026 passed in W.P.No.49758 of 2025, the fourth respondent therein has filed the present writ appeal.
The first respondent/writ petitioner has filed the writ petition to declare clause (6) of the agreement bond dated 11.9.2023 executed by him at the time of admission to the appellant college as null and void and not binding on him, as he discontinued the course.
Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that when the main relief sought in the writ petition has been rejected as is evident from Para No.8(i), the learned Single Judge ought not to have issued the direction contained in Para No.8(ii).
Procedural History
The first respondent filed W.P.No.49758 of 2025 before the Madras High Court seeking to declare clause (6) of the agreement bond as null and void. The learned Single Judge rejected the main prayer but directed return of certificates. The appellant college filed the present writ appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent challenging that direction.
Acts & Sections
- Letters Patent: Clause 15
