Tamil Nadu Play School Owners Association got stay for school association adv For the play Schools Mrs. Abisha Isaac George, advocate appeared.

[18/09, 12:59] sekarreporter1: https://x.com/sekarreporter1/status/1836305943362998294?t=MZjbrOZLlUcw2Hq0GJkRAg&s=08
[18/09, 12:59] sekarreporter1: Today (18.09.2024), the Hon’ble Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Justices R. Subramanian and Justice Victoria Gowri passed an interim order of injunction restraining the School Education department of the Government of TN from enforcing certain provisions of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2018 and the Tamil
Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Rules, 2023 on the petitioner play schools in the State of Tamil Nadu.

For the play Schools Mrs. Abisha Isaac George, advocate appeared.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
BENCH AT MADURAI
(Special Original Jurisdiction)
W P. No. of 2024

Tamil Nadu Play School Owners Association
Rep. by its General Secretary
No.603, Maharaja Valar Nagar
Madurai – 625 107 … Petitioner

• vs –

1. The State of Tamil Nadu
   Rep. by its Chief Secretary Department of School Education Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
2. The Principal Secretary to the Government School Education Department, Fort St. George, Chennai – 600 009.
3. The Director of Private Schools Directorate of School Education College Road, Chennai – 600 006.
4. The Joint Director of Private Schools
   Directorate of School Education
   College Road, Chennai – 600 006. … Respondents

AFFIDAVIT OF PETITIONER

---

I, Calvary Thiyagarajan, aged about 50 years, son of Thiru.V.Natarajan, residing at No. 603, Maharaja Valar Nagar, Madurai – 625 107, now temporarily come down to Madurai, do hereby solemnly affirm and sincerely state as follows:

1. I state that I am the Secretary of the Tamil Nadu Play School Owners Association and the petitioner herein. I am well acquainted with the facts of the case.
2. I state that the petitioner Association herein namely, ‘Tamil Nadu Play School Owners Association’ (hereinafter referred as ‘the petitioner Association’), is a society registered under the Tamil Nadu Registration of Societies Act, 1975 bearing Registration S. No. 76 of 2010 dated 26.08.2010, on the file of Registrar of Societies, Madurai North, Madurai, Tamil Nadu. The members of the Association are all Play schools located across Tamil Nadu. At present there are 40 members in the Association. The age group of the children studying in the member schools are between 1 ½ and 5 ½ years and there are approximately 1,80,000 children studying in the play schools.
3. I state that the chief objects of the Association is to provide for the fraternity among its member schools represented by the President / Chairman / Secretary of each school, to provide a forum for exchange of ideas to organise educational seminars, exchange programs and in service training to the member schools and to find ways and means of solving common problems, to offer facility for research in Early childhood care and education and also in the constitution of teachers resource centres, to promote the cause of education in Pre-schools and Play schools, to co-ordinate the efforts of its members so as to ensure maximum efficiency in play-based learning for preschool children, to consider and take steps regarding all problems connected with pre-school education, the staff and management of play schools, to safeguard and promote the interest of play school owners and managements, to guide member schools on legal matters and accounting procedure, etc.,
4. I respectfully submit that the petitioner Association is rendering yeomen service in the field of nursery education. In order to achieve the objects of the Association, it is conducting periodic meetings with the members and sharing ideas for promoting early education at all levels. It has been regularly involved in several activities for the welfare of its members and has also been addressing the grievances of its members through legal proceedings and other means. Whenever any common cause arises, it represents before the appropriate forum to redress the grievances of its members. Hence, this Writ Petition.
5. I humbly state that one of the play schools in Chennai filed a Writ Petition in W.P. (MD) No. 18861 of 2014 before this Hon’ble Court to issue suitable directions to the State Government to lay down requirements for approval of play schools and pre-schools. During the course of hearing, the State Government placed before the Court the Draft Code of Regulation for Play Schools, 2015. Upon perusing the same, the Hon’ble First Bench of this Court issued the following Order dated 30.10.2015:

“We have scrutinised the draft code of Regulation for play school, 2015 and appreciate the endeavour put in by the Respondent in formulating the same.

2. There are however still some concerns expressed by the schools, which we are urged to deal with.
3. We are unable to accept the plea that the schools should not be Restricted to the ground floor, especially as these are meant for young children, being play schools. Similarly, we see no Reason why the minimum Requirement of the lease of 5 years should be reduced to 3 years as there has to be some element of permanency.
4. There are two other aspects which we feel need some minor modifications. In chapter-11, dealing with functioning of the schools, clause-17(a) provides for working of not more than 3 hours per day. It is stated that the object is that a child should not be in the school for more than 3 hours, but this clause may be suitably modified to take care of a situation where the school may Run for more than one session with different set of students.
5. the last aspect which has some bearing on the functioning of the schools is in clause-3(a), which requires the management and administration of every school to vest with only a trust or a society. The objective of the same explained by the learned special government pleader for the education department as set out from the discussion on the Recommendation is that the Right of children to Free and compulsory Education act, 2010 Read with the Rules therein provides so. We however feel that those are in the context of schools imparting Regular education, while we are dealing with pre- schools and such a stringent Requirement is not necessary, especially keeping in mind that they are often operated by ladies from their house/properties. We are thus of the view that the suggestion made by the schools for including such entities as individuals/ companies/partnership / proprietorship should also be taken care of, specifying the person who would be responsible for its functioning.
6. At this stage, another aspect Raised is qua chapter-10 dealing with admission of children to the extent that clause-16(d) Requires schools to admit children Residing within the Radius of one kilometer. It is suggested that the Radius should be extended, as one kilometer is too short a distance., though certainly young children should not be made to travel long distance. On analyzing the aforesaid plea, we are of the view that the distance be extended to three kilometres as suggested.
7. The- Regulation as amended aforesaid be notified on or before 15th December, 2015. The application accordingly stands disposed of.”
8. I humbly state that pursuant to the orders of this Hon’ble Court, the State Government notified the Code of Regulations for Play Schools, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 2015 Code’) vide G.O. Ms. No. 206 dated 22.12.2015. Regulation 2(g) of the Code defined ‘school’ as “School” means a Play School and includes Kids School or any other Pre-Kinder Garten School by whatever name it is called, which is established for imparting Informal Education to children in the age group of one and a half years (1 ½ years) to five and half years (5 ½ years) (as on 31st July of the year).
9. In accordance with the direction of this Hon’ble Court to consider permitting entities such as individuals/companies/ partnership/proprietorship also to own and manage play schools, Regulation 3 of the 2015 Code permitted Trust/Society/individuals/companies/partnership/ proprietorship to run and manage play schools by specifying the person who would be responsible for its functioning.
10. I state that based on the 2015 Code, some of the members of the petitioner Association were served with show cause notices and other proceedings. Therefore, they filed various Writ Petitions in W.P. No. 24139 of 2016, W.P. No. 29819 of 2018, etc., challenging several other provisions of the 2015 Code relating to 5-year lease period, ban on gas cylinders, etc., and seeking for Writ of declaration to declare the Code of Regulations for Play Schools, 2015, issued by the Government of Tamil Nadu as ultra vires, arbitrary and illegal. When the cases came up for final hearing, they were dismissed for nonprosecution.
11. I humbly state that thereafter the 1st respondent State enacted Act No. 35 of 2019 called the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act 2018 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 2018 Act’). This was published in the Gazette on 16.08.2019. It is pertinent to state that the Act 2018 was issued superseding the erstwhile Tamil Nadu Recognished Private Schools
    (Regulation) Act, 1973 (herein after referred as the Act, 1973).
12. It is also pertinent to state that after the Act, 1973, the State Government framed the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Rules, 1973 (herein after referred as ‘the Rules, 1973’). Both the Act, 1973 and Rules 1974 was occupying the field of regulating private schools (aided and selffinanced schools under State Board syllabus) in the State of Tamil Nadu.
13. I state that in superstition of the Act, 1973, the Act, 2018 came to be notified. Later, the 1st respondent framed Rules called the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Rules, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the 2023 Rules’) in exercise of powers under Section 56 of the Act 2018. Thereby, the Act, 2018 and Rules, 2023 came into effect from 13.02.2023 ie., the date on which the Rules, 2023 came to be notified.
14. It is pertinent to state that the ‘Play Schools’ where not governed under the erstwhile Act, 1973 and Rules, 1974. However, for the first time, the Play Schools were included in the Act, 2018 and after notification of Rules, 2023, the Play Schools are also directed to be regulated under the Act, 2018, and Rules, 2023.
15. I state that the Act, 2018 defines the ‘Private School’ as ‘a Play School, Nursery and Primary, Primary, Middle, High and Higher Secondary Schools or Teacher Training Institute imparting education and training whether receiving grant from the Government or not, established and administered or maintained by an Educational Agency and recognised by the competent authority under this Act. As per this definition, Play schools are also brought within the ambit of Private schools and therefore the schools run by the petitioner Association namely, the ‘play schools’ are covered under ‘the 2018 Act and the 2023 Rules.
16. Unlike under the 2015 Code which gave a consolidated definition to play schools as schools imparting informal education to children in the age group of one and a half years to five and half years, the 2023 Rules categorizes them into two as ‘Play School’ and ‘Nursery School.’ The relevant definitions under the 2023 Rules are as follows:

“Rule 3. Stages of education – The following shall be the stages of education in the following categories of schools, namely:-

a) “Play School”: includes Kids school, Pre-Primary, Nursery, Kindergarten and Montessori school, by whatever name called;
b) “Nursery and Primary School”: from standards LKG to V;
c) “Primary School”: from standards I to V;

13. Rule 17(4) of the Rules 2023 which relates to
    ‘Regulation of Admission’ lays down the following:

“17(4) The minimum age for admission as on the 31st day
of July of the year of admission shall be,- (i) for Play School, completed two years of age;
(ii) for LKG, completed three years of age;
(iii) for UKG, completed four years of age;
(iv) for standard I, completed five years of age, and for standard II, completed six years of age and so on upto standard XII.”

14. A conjoined reading of the above provisions would show that the members of the petitioner Association constitute both Play Schools and Nursery Schools as per the 2018 Act and 2023 Rules since they cater to students up to the age of 5 ½ years.
15. I humbly submit that some of the provisions in ‘the Act 2018’ and ‘the Rules 2023’ infringe the rights of the play schools under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India in relation to their establishment and administration. That apart, except few areas, the new Act and Rules, seeks to impose all other regular conditions as applicable to the other Schools offering education upto Higher Secondary level.
16. I humbly state that ‘the 2018 Act’ defines ‘Educational Agency’ under Section 2(h). It says that Educational Agency means a Company registered under Section
    8 of the Companies Act, 2013 or a Society registered under the
    Societies Registration Act, 1860 or the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975 or a Trust created under the Indian Trust Act, 1882, which has established or proposes to establish a private school.
17. I humbly submit that pursuant to the directions given by the Hon’ble First Bench of this Court, Regulation 3 of the 2015 Code permitted for play schools to be run by either a Trust or a Society or ‘individuals’ or companies or partnership or proprietorship, by specifying the person who would be responsible for its functioning. However, the 2018 Act which now governs play schools, has once again restricted the right to establish, administer and run a play school to only a Section 8 company or a Society or Trust.
18. I humbly submit that this restriction would make it practically unfeasible for the play schools to run, because out of approximately 6000 play schools functioning in the State of Tamil Nadu, nearly 90% of them are managed and run by housewives as an entrepreneurial concern. About 30,000 people are employed in them as teaching and non-teaching staff, out of whom 90% are women. They run the play schools putting in the maximum investment they can afford and earn their livelihood through the small returns coming from it. Placing an embargo on individuals or proprietorships from running play schools would lead to closure of most of the play schools in the State and also affect the livelihood of these women. Moreover, it is clearly against the direction given by the First Bench of this Hon’ble Court in W.P. (MD) No. 18861 of 2014.
19. In this context, it is relevant to point out that the Ministry of Women and Child Development (MWCD),
    Government of India introduced the National Early Childhood Care and Education Policy [ECCE] in 2013 with a view to reaffirm the Nation’s commitment towards the right of children to care, nutrition, health and education in early childhood. The crucial role of quality pre-school education was recognised through the 86th Constitutional Amendment, which introduced Article 45 that states, “The State shall endeavour to provide early childhood care and education for all children until they complete the age of six years”.
20. I humbly state that based on the National ECCE Policy 2013, the National Commission for Protection of Child Rights [NCPCR] developed Regulatory Guidelines for Private Play Schools on 11.07.2022, taking into consideration the distinct characteristics of play schools. Section 1(d) of the Guidelines states that “The State may notify these guidelines or adopt content of these guidelines as legislation to regulate private play schools in their respective States, save as otherwise given in the Guidelines.” Based on the same, several states such as Himachal Pradesh, Jharkhand, etc., have notified separate legislations for regulation of play schools under the respective departments of social welfare and child development.
21. It is pertinent to note that the ECCE Policy 2013 does not place any restriction on who can run and manage play schools and recognizes the establishment and administration of play schools by organizations, institutions and individuals as could be seen in the Certificate of Recognition Format annexed with the Policy. Therefore, the embargo placed on individuals and proprietorships from owning, establishing and administering play schools is violative of their rights under
    Article 19(1)(g) and also contradictory to the ECCE Policy 2013.
22. I humbly state that Section 3 of ‘the Act 2018’ relating to power to regulate school education offends the play schools’ right under Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution of India to carry on any occupation, trade or business. Section 3(2)(b) of the Act says that the Government or any competent authority shall have power to permit an educational agency to establish and administer a school in accordance with the conditions as may be prescribed. The members of the petitioner Association have the right under Article 19(1) (g) to establish and administer educational institutions. Therefore, this particular provision empowering the Government to permit an educational agency to establish and administer the play school infringes the rights of the members of the petitioner Association.
23. I humbly state that the corresponding Rule 2(b) which defines ‘appellate authority’ and Rule 2(f) which defines ‘competent authority’ read along with Annexure I-B under the 2023 Rules states that the competent authority and the appellate authority for play schools is the District Educational Officer (Play Schools) and the Joint Director (Private Schools) respectively.
24. As per the ECCE Policy 2013, the Union Ministry of Education will carve out the ECCE curriculum and pedagogy at the national level, whereas the supervision, planning, implementation and regulation of early childhood care and education will be carried out jointly by the Ministries of HRD, Women and Child Development (WCD), Health and Family
    Welfare (HFW), and Tribal Affairs. This means that the policy will be decided by the Ministry of Education and the implementation and regulation of the policy will be handled by the other Social Welfare Ministries.
25. It is pertinent to state that the above ideology of regulating the Play Schools through Social Welfare Department is also emphasised in the recent Report submitted by His
    Lordship Justice K. Chandru (Retired) pertaining to ——————————————————————-.
26. Following suit, Section 2(d) of the 2022 National Regulatory Guidelines for Play Schools also defines “Competent authority” as the District level nodal officer responsible for implementation of Integrated Child Development Services (ICDS) under department of WCD/Social Justice as applicable in respective states/UTs. The 2022 Regulatory Guidelines states that the competent authority for granting recognition, inspecting the play school, etc., is the Department of Women and Child Development or the Social Justice Department.
27. It is humbly submitted that pursuant to the ECCE Policy 2013, several other States have taken into consideration the unique characteristics of play schools and have enacted separate, special legislations for regulation of play schools. For instance, the State of Himachal Pradesh has enacted the Himachal Pradesh Early Childhood Care and Education Centres (Registration and Regulation) Act, 2017 under which, following the National Regulatory Guidelines for Private Play Schools 2022, the competent authority is the Department of Women and Child Development.
28. Similarly, the State of Jharkhand has also legislated the Jharkhand State Play Schools (Recognition and Control) Rules, 2017 in consonance with the ECCE Policy 2013, where the competent authority is the District level nodal officer responsible for implementation of ICDS under Department of Women, Child Development & Social Security, Government of Jharkhand.
29. Likewise, the State of Maharashtra also issued the Early Childhood Care & Education (ECCE) Policy, 2019 wherein the competent authority for granting approvals to play schools or pre-schools is the State’s ECCE Council set up under the
    Department of Women and Child Development. In the State of Haryana as well recognition for play schools is granted by Women and Child Development Department as seen on their official government website. The State of Punjab has also issued the Punjab State Regulatory Guidelines for Play Schools, 2021 based on the National ECCE Policy 2013 under the Department of Social Security, Women and Child Development, wherein the competent authority is the District Women & Child Development Officer.
30. The corresponding Department in the State of Tamil Nadu would be the Department of Social Welfare and Women
    Empowerment. However, in violation of the National Regulatory Guidelines 2022, the respondent State Government has bestowed all powers of regulation and supervision of play schools on the Department of Education. This will cause several difficulties because, placing the regulation of play schools which impart informal education under the same Department that regulates regular school education would create confusion and chaos with respect to grant of recognition and other approvals. If the Play Schools are to be regulated by the School Education Department it will lose the significance on Children care.
31. It is relevant to point out that even as per the key principles and recommendations under the National Education Policy, 2020 regarding the State school education system, it is clearly stated that the Department of School Education of every State will not be involved with the provision and operation of schools or with the regulation of schools, in order to ensure due focus on the improvement of public schools and to eliminate conflict of interests. The NEP 2020 suggests that the Department of School Education will handle the educational operations and service provision for the public schooling system of the whole State and be responsible for overall monitoring and policymaking for continual improvement of the public education system.
32. The Policy further suggests that the State Governments should set up an independent, State-wide, body called the State School Standards Authority (SSSA), which will establish a minimal set of standards based on basic parameters (namely, safety, security, basic infrastructure, number of teachers across subjects and grades, financial probity, and sound processes of governance), which shall be followed by all schools. The framework for these parameters will be created by the SCERT in consultation with various stakeholders, especially teachers and schools. This would help in understanding the ground reality of running schools and the standards will be prescribed accordingly.
33. However, contradictory to the NEP 2020 and the National Regulatory Guidelines for Private Play Schools 2022, the respondent State Government has bestowed all the powers of regulation and standards prescription of play schools to the Department of School Education without either constituting a special body for the same or bringing it under the regime of the Department of Social Welfare and Women Empowerment. It should also be noted that the Directorate of School Education (Private Schools) lacks the expertise to monitor pre-schools in terms of child development indicators, which form the most significant part of the ECCE Policy 2013.
34. It is further submitted that out of the 3 States that have enacted laws for play schools post the ECCE Policy 2013 namely, Tamil Nadu, Jharkhand and Maharashtra, only the State of Tamil Nadu has made and retained the Department of School Education as the regulatory body for play schools. The other 2 States have designated the respective Departments of Social Welfare and Child/Women development as the regulatory bodies. As of 2024, even in the National capital Delhi, play schools are required to register with the Department of Women and Child Development of the Delhi government.
35. I humbly state that Section 4 of the 2018 Act, which deals with obtaining permission to establish a private school, and Section 5 which provides for application for permission, and Section 6 which provides for grant of permission, offend the rights of the members of the petitioner Association under Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution of India.
36. I state that further, the corresponding Rules viz,. Rule 5 of the 2023 Rules relating to application for permission to establish and administer the school, and Rule 6 relating to grant of permission, and Rule 7 relating to appeal against order of refusal of permission are all violative of the rights of the petitioner schools under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India.
37. In this connection, Rule 5 of the 2023 Rules states that every application for permission to establish a private school shall be submitted in Form I-A by the educational agency to the competent authority. A perusal of the Form I-A shows that under point (10), the following certificates are to be enclosed:
    (i) Structural Stability Certificate from the competent authority in Public Works Department or from the Private Engineers (in the panel of Registered Engineers maintained by the District Collectors) in accordance with the Tamil Nadu Public Building (Licensing) Act, 1965 (Tamil Nadu Act XIII of 1965);
    (ii) Building Licence issued by the competent authority under the Tamil Nadu Public Building (Licensing) Act, 1965 (Tamil Nadu Act XIII of 1965);
    (iii) Sanitary Certificate issued by the Local Health Authorities;
    (iv) ‘No Objection Certificate’ from the Station Officer, Fire and Rescue Services Department.”
38. Rule 8(3) relating to the grant of certificate of recognition stipulates that states that no application for grant of certificate of recognition shall be submitted after a lapse of three years from the date of receipt of the order granting permission under Rule 6. Rule 8(6) lays down the following:

“For the purpose of grant of certificate of recognition, the educational agency shall fulfil the following conditions, namely:-

(a) shall possess a contiguous single plot of land of not less than the requirement as specified in Annexure II, together with the infrastructure as specified in Annexure III;

(b) the required land shall be surrounded on all sides by a boundary wall;

(c) the land shall be owned or held in lease by the educational agency, by a valid registered document;

(d) if the land is held in lease, the lease deed shall be for a period of not less than fifteen years: Provided that the lease deed executed by the Government may be for a period of not less than five years;

(e) shall furnish the following Certificates, namely:-

(i) Structural Stability Certificate from the competent authority in Public Works
Department or from the Private Engineers (in the panel of Registered Engineers maintained by the District Collectors) in accordance with the Tamil Nadu Public Building (Licensing) Act, 1965 (Tamil Nadu Act XIII of 1965);
(ii) Building Licence issued by the competent authority under the Tamil Nadu Public Building (Licensing) Act, 1965 (Tamil Nadu Act XIII of 1965);
(iii) Sanitary Certificate issued by the Local Health Authorities;
(iv) ‘No Objection Certificate’ from the Station Officer, Fire and Rescue Services Department;

(f) shall create and maintain a minimum endowment in the name of the school, to the extent of the amount specified below or as may be specified by the Government from time to time, in the form of fixed deposits in any nationalized bank or in any Government authorized agency or undertaking for a period of not less than seven years:

The Table.
Sl.No. Category of School Amount (in Rupees)
(1) (2) (3)
(i) Play School Fifty thousand only
(ii) Nursery and Primary School One lakh only

38. Rule 8(8) of the 2023 Rules states that the certificate of recognition shall be issued for the period specified in the structural stability certificate or the building licence whichever is earlier.
39. I humbly submit that as per the Tamil Nadu Public Building (Licensing) Act, 1965 (hereinafter the 1965 Act), an application for Building License cannot be obtained without a Structural Stability Certificate. Therefore, only after receiving the Structural Stability Certificate which takes about 6 months to obtain, an application for Building license can be made. As per the 1965 Act, building licence granted under sub-section (1) shall be valid for a period of three years or for such shorter period as the competent authority may specify in the licence.
40. A combined reading of all these Rules would mean that by the time a person obtains a Certificate of Recognition after submitting the Structural Stability Certificate, Building License, Sanitary Certificate and No-Objection Certificate and getting permission from the competent authority, it would be close to the deadline for renewal of recognition. Rule 8(8) stating that the certificate of recognition shall be issued for the period specified in the structural stability certificate or the building licence, whichever is earlier, would render the whole process of obtaining recognition redundant. Such a protracted procedure of first securing permission, the recognition and ultimately the period of recognition being limited to the period specified in the structural stability certificate or the building licence, whichever is earlier, defeats the entire intent of the policy to regulate play schools. The procedure contemplated is a wearisome process for play schools which would bury them in paperwork and ultimately affect their very existence.
41. It is apposite to point out at this juncture that even in the National Capital of Delhi, play schools have to be only registered with the Department of Women and Child Development and there is no direction to obtain recognition. Also, the State of Karnataka issued Notification No. ED 512 PGC 2015 dated 18.01.2016 cancelling the applicability of the previous notification No. ED 369 PGC 2014 dated 11.11.2014 which stipulated for permission for establishing educational institutions, in so far as pre-primary schools are concerned. The new guidelines issued therewith provides only for registration of pre-primary schools and does not mandate grant of permission from the competent authority to establish a pre-primary school. The Guidelines provide a simple, straightforward procedure for registration of play schools unlike the 2018 Tamil Nadu Act with mandates both permission and recognition through a cumbersome process.
42. I humbly state that Section 10 of the 2018 Act states that the competent authority may by an order withdraw permanently the recognition of any private school, which does not comply with any of the provisions of the Act or the Rules or the directions issued thereunder. This power of withdrawal is unrestricted and uncanalised which affects the rights of the play schools under Article 19(1)(g).
43. I humbly state that Rule 8(6)(d) of the 2023 Rules stipulates that if the land in which the school is held is in lease, the lease deed shall be for a period of not less than fifteen years. It is to be noted that the 2023 Rules have increased the requirement of lease period from 5 years (as per the 2015 Code) to 15 years. This would affect all existing play schools in the State of Tamil Nadu because most of the play schools are currently functioning in rented spaces with less than 5-year lease period. Because most of the schools function in residential buildings, the landlords provide only for short-term leases. If 15-year lease period is mandated for running of play schools, then 90% of the schools in the State would be closed down.
44. Secondly, it is impossible to alter the structures and physical features of the existing buildings in which the play schools are functioning and compelling them to alter the same in order to obtain a certificate of recognition would amount to indirectly forcing them to close the school, which is violative of Article 19(1)(g) and Article 14.
45. I humbly state that Rule 8(6)(a) read with Annexure II stipulates that the minimum land requirement for play school and pre-primary school is 1 ground irrespective of the location of the school. It is humbly submitted that for safety, security and hygiene reasons, play schools have to be located in residential areas that are well maintained. Secondly, they have to be located in areas which is not very far away from their residences and where it is not inconvenient and easily accessible for the parents to leave their young children.
46. That being so, the choices of buildings for renting or leasing for running the play school is very limited and expensive. Hence, putting such a stringent general condition on the minimum land requirement of play schools, without examining it based on the locality and on a case-by-case basis, would be a great burden on the play school owners.
47. It is relevant to point out at this juncture that the ECCE Policy 2013 does not prescribe any minimum land area or square feet for the play school building under the Norms and Standards for Play schools and only focuses on the safety, security and hygiene aspects of the buildings. The State Laws which have followed the ECCE Policy such as Jharkhand, Himachal Pradesh and Maharashtra also do not impose any minimum land requirement. Moreover, even under the 2019 Guidelines on Pre-school Education issued by the National Council of Educational Research and Training [NCERT] on required physical infrastructure, teacher-pupil ratio, staff qualifications, etc., for play schools, there is no prescription of minimum land requirement for play schools. Other State Acts following the ECCE Policy 2013 such as the Himachal Pradesh Act, 2017 also prescribes only a safe building having easy approach and clean surrounding area, without any imposition of minimum land area.
48. It is humbly submitted that play schools cater to children from all socio-economic backgrounds and therefore very stringent rules on the square feet area of the buildings and physical structures, could indirectly financially burden the children and deprive them of affordable early childhood care. As contemplated under the ECCE Policy 2013 and the NCERT 2019 Guidelines, norm should be to check the health and safety aspects of the building and not impose conditions that are impossible for compliance, especially for existing play schools.
49. Furthermore, Annexure II-A under the 2023 Rules stipulates that the teacher pupil ration should be 1:15 for prekindergarten classes. This is discriminatory when other classes are permitted to have double the number of students viz., 1:30. This is pertinent especially when the 2022 National Regulatory Guidelines for Play Schools prescribes only a 1:20 ratio. Moreover, the NCERT Guidelines for Pre-school Education also states the requirement as “One for 20 children with a helper for 3–4 years old; One teacher for 25 children with a helper for 4–6 years old.” That being so, keeping the teacher-pupil ration to 1:15 would create an undue burden on the play schools.
50. I humbly state that Rule 8(6)(f) of the 2023 Rules which stipulates the creation and maintenance of endowment in the name of the school is also superfluous in the case of play schools and unconstitutional.
51. I state that further Rule 8(6)(g) which provides for deposit of a sum equivalent to one month salary of the staff employed in a school, is violative of rights under Article 19(1) (g). Furthermore, Rule 13 which provides for grant of permission of additional section or to introduce additional medium of instruction or new group of subjects cannot be made applicable for play schools. It is respectfully submitted that the recognition for the same is held to be sufficient in view of the protection given under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.
52. I state that so also, Section 11 which gives the State Government the power to withdraw recognition in so far as it says that consequent to the withdrawal of recognition, the educational agency shall handover all the records and documents of the school to the officer authorized by the competent authority. This affects the rights under Article 19(1) (g). The corresponding Rule 10 which provides for appeal against the order of refusing to grant certificate of recognition is also violative of play schools’ right under Article 19(1)(g). So also, Rule 11(2)(c) which provides for withdrawal of certificate of recognition to the extent that directions can be issued by the authority concerned under the Act and the Rules. Such provision providing for unexplained powers of directions cannot be made applicable to the play schools.
53. I humbly state that Section 13 of the 2018 Act mandates that whenever there is a change in the constitution of the educational agency or transfer of the management of the educational agency to another one, the same has to be approved by the competent authority. This is violative of the rights of the play schools under Article 19(1)(g) as it interferes in their right to administration.
54. I humbly state that Section 14 in relation to constitution of School Committee for the play schools and the corresponding Rules 24 and 25(2) of the 2023 Rules offends the play schools’ rights under Article 19(1) (g) of the Constitution of India. The teaching staff and non-teaching staff of play schools impart informal education as stated under the National Education Policy, 2020 and therefore constitution of a School Committee akin to that of a regular school is superfluous in so far as play schools are concerned. On the same footing, Section 15 dealing with approval for removal of secretary/member of school committee is also redundant for play schools.
55. I humbly state that likewise, Section 20 deals with safety and security of the pupil. Section 20(2) provides that any condition prescribed or any direction issued by the Government or any competent authority in relation to safety and security of the pupil have to be strictly complied with. This also bestows unrestricted powers to the Government to issue any direction with respect to safety and security of pupils, without taking into account the peculiarities of a play school, which is vastly different from a regular school. It is respectfully submitted that such conditions or directions cannot take away the right under Article 19(1)(g). Therefore, to that extent, this provision also cannot be made applicable to play schools.
56. Further, Section 22(4) provides that every private school shall abide by the conditions as prescribed to prevent unhealthy competition among private schools. This is a serious violation of the right of the play schools as it is not defined what those conditions are. Any condition restrictive of exercise of the right under Article 19(1)(g) is not valid.
57. I humbly state that Section 23 relates to disclosure to be made by the play school at the time of admissions. The
    Section reads that every private school shall at least 30 days prior to the commencement of admission in each academic year, publish on its notice board, website, if any, or in any other form, general information concerning the school as may be prescribed. Such prescription should not come in conflict with the rights under Article 19(1)(g).
58. I humbly state that the corresponding rule viz., Rule 17 deals with regulation of admission. Rule 17(1) states that every private school shall be governed by the instructions or the guidelines issued by the Government or the Director in respect of all matters pertaining to admission of a pupil in an academic year in the school. The instructions or the guidelines issued by the Government or the Director in respect of all matters pertaining to admission of the pupil shall not interfere in the admission process of the play schools. Moreover, it offers unfettered powers on the Government and its officials to issue any instruction or guidelines without any legislative guidance and in such regard, the Section and the Rules cannot be made applicable.
59. Also, Rule 17(4)(i) restricts age of admission to play school to 2 years whereas it is 1 ½ years under the 2015 Code. This would be a difficulty for working parents of small kids aged between 1 ½ and 2. Also, there is no intelligible differentia or any explanation stated in any of the provisions as to why the age limit has been changed from 1 ½ to 2 years.
60. I humbly state that Rule 22 of the 2023 Rules provides for academic achievement in private schools. Rules 22(1)(d) provides that the schools shall follow the best teaching learning practices as per the advisories and guidelines issued by the Government from time to time. This is also not in tune with the rights under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution. Play schools follow different methods of education such as the Montessori Method, the Reggio Emilia Method, the Play Way Method, the Waldorf Method, etc., depending on the locality and other requirements and demands of the young children and their parents. Therefore, different schools are entitled to follow reasonable practices and methods which they choose that would best help the children to be prepared for regular school education. The NEP 2020 states that the foundational stage will comprise 5 years of flexible, multilevel, play/activity-based learning for young children. Flexibility is one of the key aspects of pre-school education. Hence, prescription of any specific learning practice or any interference in the learning method would affect the functioning of the play schools and affect the children’s curated learning process.
61. I humbly state that Section 24 of the Act provides for formation of Parent Teacher Association in such manner and to perform such functions. The corresponding Rule 41 of the Rules deal with the composition of the Parent Teacher Association and its functions. Such a requirement is unnecessary and superfluous as far as play schools are concerned.
62. I humbly state that Section 25 of the Act relates to furnishing of information to authorized person or authority and deployment of staff. Such a condition would be violative of Article 19(1)(g) in so far as it is detrimental to healthy competitive interests of the play schools.
63. I humbly state that Section 26 of the Act deals with fees. It states no private school shall collect any other charge or receive any other payment by whatever name called, except the fee fixed by the Fee Determination Committee constituted under the Tamil Nadu Schools (Regulation of Collection of Fee) Act, 2009. This is also not in tune with the right under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.
64. I humbly state that Section 27 relates to utilization of funds and the property of private schools. This also interferes with the right of administration of the play schools derived from Article 19(1)(g). So also, the corresponding Rule 35 that provides for prior permission for diversion of funds from one purpose to another also interferes with the right of administration. It is permissible to divert funds for educational purposes and no prior permission is required with regard to the same.
65. I humbly state that Section 28 deals with inspection and enquiry. This section gives unbridled power of inspection and enquiry to the competent authorities. It also provides for direction to be issued by authorities to the school if to their satisfaction it fails in relation to the action to be taken on the finding of the inspection and enquiry. This threatens the right of the administration of the play schools’ management, especially since play schools are essentially care centres that function in a homely atmosphere best suited for little children.
66. I humbly state that Section 29 of the 2018 Act deals with prior approval of the competent authority for closure of the school. It is respectfully submitted that since play schools are mostly run by homemakers, they may not be able to go through such an arduous process of seeking approval from the authorities for closure in case of any difficulty or financial issues in running the play school. Especially Section 29(4)(b) which states that the school shall continue to run in case the competent authority refuses to grant prior approval for closure of the school is arbitrary and an infringement upon the rights of the schools.
67. I humbly state that Section 30 relates to restriction on alienation of property of private school. No restriction can be imposed on alienation of property of a school if it is done for the furtherance of the object of the school and for educational purposes. The corresponding Rule 40 of the Rules, 2023 in relation to the same also cannot be made applicable. Rule 40 also provides that the sale proceeds shall be duly credited into the school account instead of the educational agency. This also affects the right of administration. It is pertinent to note that since most of the existing play schools are run by individuals or as proprietorships, the school account and the educational agency’s account would be the same account.
68. Section 31 and the corresponding Rule 27 deals with appointment of Special Officers. This Section gives sweeping powers to the competent authority and the Government. Since constitution of a School Committee is redundant in the case of play schools, Section 31 and Rule 27 cannot be made applicable.
69. I humbly state that Section 32 deals with
    appointment of staff of schools and their conditions of service. Section 32(1) states that the school committee of the private school may appoint such staff as may be necessary for the school. Since the composition of the school committee under Rule 24 also cannot be made applicable, the provision for appointment of staff by the school committee in the form it is given cannot be made applicable. The teaching and the nonteaching staff of the existing play schools are appointed by the owners of the play school themselves.
70. I humbly state that Section 34 provides that the staff of private school shall be governed by such Code of Conduct as may be formulated by the Government. The corresponding Rule framed by the Government viz., Rule 36 enumerates the code of conduct to be followed by a staff employed in a private school with 41 conditions that are similar to that of a government employee. Since the play schools are mostly run by homemakers and the staff employed in the play schools are also mostly women, imposing conditions on teaching and non-teaching such as submission of property return statement once in every five years (Rule 36(2)(v)), shall not decline to attend any inservice training organized by the Government including holidays or vacation (Rule 26(2)(vii)), etc., are superfluous in so far as staff working in play schools are concerned and are violative of their fundamental rights under Article 19(1). It is also pertinent to point out that the 2022 National Regulatory Guidelines for Play Schools does not prescribe such an extensive Code of Conduct for staff of play schools and only states their duties and responsibilities.
71. I humbly state that Chapter IX of the Act deals with Appeal & Revision. Section 41 provides for appeal against competent authority. It states that any person aggrieved by any order, decision or direction of the competent authority made under any of the provisions of the Act or the Rules made thereunder may prefer an appeal to the Appellate authority as may be prescribed. Section 42 deals with powers of the appellate authority in relation to the Appeal preferred. These are direct interference in the administration of the play schools which are not run with the rigor of a regular school. So also, Section 43 relating to Revision before the Government. The corresponding Rule 33 also in view of the above, cannot be made applicable to play schools.
72. I humbly state that Chapter X of the Act deals with Accounts and Audit. Section 44 provides for Annual Audit of accounts. Section 44(2)(c) provides for school committee taking action as may be specified by the competent authority. Section 45 deals with furnishing of returns, etc., It reads that the school committee shall furnish to the competent authority such returns, statistics and other information as required by the competent authority. Since constitution of a School Committee is unnecessary and redundant in so far as play schools are concerned, the requirements under Section 44 also do not apply to play schools.
73. Moreover, the powers of the competent authority under Section 44 and 45 are unrestricted and therefore they interfere with the right of administration of the members of the petitioner Association emanating from Article 19(1)(g).
74. I humbly state that Chapter XI provides for miscellaneous provisions. Section 47 of the Act deals with power of the Government to give directions to make enquiry. The nature of the enquiry is not stated and it creates scope for arbitrariness. It affects the rights of the schools of the petitioner Association.
75. I humbly state that Section 55 deals with finality of orders, etc. passed under this Act. The section provides that any order made, decision taken or direction issued by any authority or officer in respect of any matter to be determined for the purposes of this Act, shall, subject only to appeal or revision, if any, provided under this Act, be final. This is also interference in the right of administration of the play schools.
76. I humbly state that Rule 40 prohibits transfer of immovable property of a private school without obtaining prior permission of the competent authority. This is based upon the limited definition given to ‘educational agency’ under Section 2(h) of the 2018 Act permitting only a Society or a Trust or a Section 8 company to own and run play schools, effectively not allowing individuals and proprietors from owning and running play schools. For the very same grounds stated in paragraph … of this affidavit, Rule 40 is unconstitutional.
77. I humbly state that Rule 42 read with Annexure – VII in so far as it relates to maintenance of records is superfluous in the case of play schools and is in conflict with their rights and therefore cannot be made applicable.
78. It is respectfully submitted that the above impugned provisions cannot be made applicable to the play schools. These provisions are stringent, making it almost impossible for existing play schools to function and highly deterrent to establishing future play schools and are therefore unconstitutional.
79. I humbly state that play schools are not imparting formal education but provide the foundation for formal education. As per the National Education Policy, 2020 Play schools and Pre-schools form the foundational basis for rest of the formal school education from Grade I to Grade XII. It states that education given to children prior to the age of 5 is considered as ‘Preparatory class’ which is based primarily on play-based learning with a focus on developing cognitive, affective, and psychomotor abilities and early literacy and numeracy. Play schools lay the foundation for a child’s social, emotional, and cognitive development. They are centres that provide child care and moulding so as to enable the children to be prepared for formal education in a regular school. Therefore, their role in the education sector and the lives of the children of the country is indispensable. The 2018 Act and the 2023 Rules threaten the smooth functioning of the play schools which has been so for the past 40 years.
80. Therefore, for all the above reasons, it is unreasonable, unfair and unconstitutional to treat play schools/pre-schools on par with regular schools and govern them under the same legislation. Such a treatment would fall afoul of the equality clause under Article 14 of the Constitution and frustrate the very intent of regulation of play schools. Moreover, it will affect the livelihood of thousands of play school owners across the State of Tamil Nadu who have been running play schools for decades together.
81. As of now, only … play schools have obtained recognition in the State of Tamil Nadu under the 2018 Act and the 2023 Rules and this reflects the unrealistic and restrictive procedure contemplated under these laws.
82. Therefore, for all the above reasons, it is unreasonable, unfair and unconstitutional to treat play schools/pre-schools on par with regular schools and govern them under the same legislation. Such a treatment would fall afoul of the equality clause under Article 14 of the Constitution and frustrate the very intent of regulation of play schools. Even the 2015 Code defined play school as school imparting informal education whereas the 2018 Act has totally discarded this crucial aspect. Moreover, enforcement of the above provisions will affect the livelihood of thousands of play school owners across the State of Tamil Nadu who have been running play schools for several decades.
83. It is therefore respectfully submitted that the above referred provisions viz., Sections 2(h), 3 to 6, 10 and 11, 13, 14, 15, 20, 22 to 28, 29, 30 to 32, 34, 41 to 45, 47, 55 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2018 and Rules 2(b), 2(f), 5 to 8, 10 and 11, 13, 17, 21 and 22, 24 to 38 and 40 to 42 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Rules 2023, infringe on the rights of the play schools. It would be violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. Therefore, the above Sections and Rules are liable to declared as not applicable to the play schools in the State of Tamil Nadu on the following among other grounds:

G R O U N D S

A. The impugned provisions viz., Sections 2(h), 3 to 6, 10 and 11, 13, 14, 15, 20, 22 to 28, 29, 30 to 32, 34, 41 to 45, 47, 55 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2018 and Rules 2(b), 2(f), 5 to 8, 10 and 11, 13, 17, 21 and 22, 24 to 38 and 40 to 42 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Rules 2023, are ultravires and unconstitutional in as much as they encroach upon the fundamental rights of the play schools in relation to their establishment and administration.

B. Whereas under Article 19(1)(g) the members of the petitioner Tamil Nadu Play Schools Association have the right to establish and administer play schools, the impugned provisions are ultravires and unconstitutional.

C. Whereas the right to establish and administer includes establishing the schools without seeking permission of the Government to establish them, the impugned provisions are ultravires and unconstitutional.

D. Restricting individuals or proprietors from owning and managing play schools is violative of Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution.

E. Imposition of the 15-year lease period, extensive Code of Conduct for the staff of play schools, teacher pupil ration of 1:15, and several other conditions placed on play schools under the 2018 Act and the 2023 Rules are contradictory to the ECCE Policy 2013, the 2022 National Regulatory Guidelines on Play Schools issued by the NCPCR and the NCERT Guidelines on PreSchool Education.

F. Whereas the right to establishment and administer includes the right of the Management to choose its Governing Body to conduct and manage the affairs of the schools, the impugned provisions are ultravires and unconstitutional.

G. In as much as it has been held that the right to establish and administer includes the right to appoint teaching staff as also non-teaching staff, and to take action if there is dereliction of duty on the part of its employees, the impugned provisions are ultravires and unconstitutional.

H. In as much as it has been held that the right under Article 19 (1) (g) includes the right to admit eligible students and to set up reasonable fee structure, the impugned provisions are ultravires and unconstitutional.

I. Even as it has been held that the right to establish and administer includes the right to use its properties and assets for the benefit of the school, the impugned provisions are ultravires and unconstitutional.

J. Even as it has been held that no service conditions of the employees that interfere in the right of administration can be imposed by the State, the impugned provisions are ultravires and unconstitutional.

K. Whereas the State’s regulatory power is restricted to the prescription of qualifications, and the same does not extend to the mode or method of recruitment, the impugned provisions are ultravires and unconstitutional.

L. Even as the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that a law which interferes with choice of qualified teachers, or the management’s disciplinary control over teachers and other members of the staff is void, the impugned provisions are void in so far as the petitioner play schools are concerned.

M. Whereas the Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that the conferment of such blanket power (relating to appeal) for vetoing the disciplinary action of the managing body of an educational institution makes a serious inroad on the right of the Managing Body to administer an educational institution, the impugned provisions relating to appeal are not applicable to minority institutions.

N. Whereas the Hon’ble Supreme Court has declared that the right conferred under Article 19 (1) (g) of the Constitution of India cannot be allowed to be whittled down by any measure masquerading as a regulation, the impugned provisions are unconstitutional, ultra vires and void.

O. Even as it is settled by the Hon’ble Supreme Court that in the statutory provisions which regulate the facet of administration like Controlling, Educational Agency, Governing Bodies, Conditions of Affiliation including Recognition/Withdrawals thereof, and appointment of staff, employees, teachers and Principals including their service conditions and Regulation of Fees, etc., interfere with the right of administration of the institution, the impugned provisions are ultravires and unconstitutional.

P. Whereas rules/regulations if they interfere with the overall administrative control by the management over the staff, or abridges/dilutes in any other manner, the right to establish and administer educational institutions, such regulations, to that extent are not applicable to the petitioner play schools, the impugned provisions are unconstitutional.

Q. The impugned provisions of the 2018 Act and the 2023 Rules are arbitrary, unfair and unreasonable in as much as they impose several conditions retrospectively and place undue burden on existing play schools in the State, indirectly leading to their closure.

R. Mechanically placing Play schools and Regular schools which hardly share any homogenous traits under the same Law, without considering the National Policies and Guidelines and the very own previous Code issued by the State Government for Play Schools in 2015, falls afoul of the equality clause under Article 14 of the Constitution.

84. Having left with no other alternative efficacious remedy, the petitioner Association humbly invokes the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for redressal. Law is well settled that the High Courts while exercising jurisdiction under this
    Article have the power to reach injustice wherever found and to mould the relief according to the peculiar and complicated requirements of the country. The members of the petitioner Association state that they have not filed any Writ Petition or instituted any suit or other legal proceedings in any Court, Tribunal or Forum regarding this subject matter except the above.
85. In the above circumstances, the petitioner humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ, Order or Direction in the nature of a WRIT OF DECLARATION declaring Sections 2(h), 3 to 6, 10 and 11, 13, 14, 15, 20, 22 to
    28, 29, 30 to 32, 34, 41 to 45, 47, 55 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2018 and Rules 2(b), 2(f), 5 to 8, 10 and 11, 13, 17, 21 and 22, 24 to 38 and 40 to 42 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Rules 2023, as not applicable to the member play schools of the Tamil Nadu Play School
    Owners Association, and pass such further or other suitable Order / Orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, and thus render Justice.
86. It is further submitted that the impugned Sections
    2(h), 3 to 6, 10 and 11, 13, 14, 15, 20, 22 to 28, 29, 30 to 32, 34, 41 to 45, 47, 55 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2018 and Rules 2(b), 2(f), 5 to 8, 10 and 11, 13, 17, 21 and 22, 24 to 38 and 40 to 42 of the Tamil Nadu
    Private Schools (Regulation) Rules 2023, are ultravires and void as against the petitioner Association and its members. Now, due to the coming into effect of these provisions the respondents are invoking the same against the play schools with full rigor.
87. Due to the above imbroglio, the respondents are issuing show cause notices and threatening to close down the play schools that have not complied with all the provisions of the new laws. This would detrimentally affect 6000 play schools, 1,80,000 children studying in them and the 30,000 teaching and non-teaching staff working in them. It would also seriously prejudice the livelihood of thousands of housewives and women entrepreneurs who are owning and running the play schools and cause them grave prejudice, irreparable hardship and heavy mental and financial loss. In turn, it would irreparably affect Early Childhood Care and Education in the entire State.
88. Hence, unless the operation of Sections 2(h), 3 to 6,
    10 and 11, 13, 14, 15, 20, 22 to 28, 29, 30 to 32, 34, 41 to 45, 47, 55 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2018 and Rules 2(b), 2(f), 5 to 8, 10 and 11, 13, 17, 21 and 22, 24 to 38 and 40 to 42 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Rules 2023 are stayed, grave prejudice would be caused to the play schools forming the petitioner Association. The balance of convenience is also in favour of the play school owners belonging to the petitioner Association.
89. For the above reasons, the petitioner humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue Ad INTERIM STAY against the operation of Sections 2(h), 3 to 6, 10 and 11,
    13, 14, 15, 20, 22 to 28, 29, 30 to 32, 34, 41 to 45, 47, 55 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2018 and Rules 2(b), 2(f), 5 to 8, 10 and 11, 13, 17, 21 and 22, 24 to 38 and 40 to 42 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Rules 2023, in so far as it relates to the members of the petitioner Tamil
    Nadu Play School Owners Association, pending disposal of the
    Writ Petition, and pass such further or other suitable Order / Orders as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case, and thus render Justice.
90. For the above reasons, the petitioner humbly prays that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue Ad INTERIM INJUNCTION restraining the respondents, their men or agents or servants or officials from in any manner enforcing the impugned Sections 2(h), 3 to 6, 10 and 11, 13, 14, 15, 20, 22 to 28, 29, 30 to 32, 34, 41 to 45, 47, 55 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2018 and Rules 2(b), 2(f), 5 to 8, 10 and 11, 13, 17, 21 and 22, 24 to 38 and 40 to 42 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Rules 2023 on the play schools owned and/or run by the members of the petitioner
    Tamil Nadu Play School Owners Association and/or closing or threatening to close them down, pending disposal of the Writ
    Petition.

Solemnly affirmed and BEFORE ME signed his name in my presence at Chennai
on this the 16th day
of July 2024 ADVOCATE : MADURAI

34th & last page
Corrns : Nil