G.Prabhu vs The State of Tamil Nadu — WP/18460/2026
Case under Others Section 1. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OF on 02nd June 2026.
CNR: HCMA010961482026
Filing Number
WP/71194/2026
Filing Date
20-Apr-2026
Registration No
WP/18460/2026
Registration Date
06-May-2026
Judge
Honourable Mr.Justice Mohammed Shaffiq
Coram
Honourable Mr.Justice Mohammed Shaffiq
Bench Type
Single Bench
Category
Education ( 54 )
Judicial Branch
WRITSECTION
Decision Date
02-Jun-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OF
Last updated 03-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.G.Prabhu
Adv. M.Venkadesh Kumar
Respondent(s)
-
1.The State of Tamil Nadu
-
2.The Director of Elementary Education
-
3.The Director, Elementary Education (Todarkakal Kalvi)
-
4.The Chief Educational Officer
-
5.The District Elementary Education Officer (DEEO)
-
6.The Block Education Officer (BEO)
-
7.Thiru.Ira.Jeyapal
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
02-Jun-2026
Honourable Mr.Justice Mohammed ShaffiqView PDF
Case Summary: WP 18460/2026 - G.Prabhu v. State of Tamil Nadu The Madras High Court set aside a loan recovery order against G.Prabhu, a 100% visually impaired government school teacher, finding procedural violations. The Chief Educational Officer had ordered recovery of loan amounts allegedly obtained by a former headmaster (7th respondent) without Prabhu's consent. Though Prabhu appeared and provided explanation, the impugned order made no reference to or consideration of his response. The court directed fresh proceedings with proper hearing within two weeks and suspended recovery until then. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
02-Jun-2026
For Admission
Honourable Mr.Justice Mohammed Shaffiq
-
20-Apr-2026
Case filed
Registration No. WP/18460/2026
Case Summary: WP 18460/2026 - G.Prabhu v. State of Tamil Nadu The Madras High Court set aside a loan recovery order against G.Prabhu, a 100% visually impaired government school teacher, finding procedural violations. The Chief Educational Officer had ordered recovery of loan amounts allegedly obtained by a former headmaster (7th respondent) without Prabhu's consent. Though Prabhu appeared and provided explanation, the impugned order made no reference to or consideration of his response. The court directed fresh proceedings with proper hearing within two weeks and suspended recovery until then. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts