Judgment :- Petitioner seeks writ of mandamus to initiate action against 5th respondent under Section 12 & 14 of Tamil Nadu Act 29 of 1974 and to pay the back wages to the petitioner for the period from 10.08.1988 to 12.08.1993 with interest. 2. Petitioner was the Head-Mistress of 5th respondent school. The petitioner was suspended on 10.08.1988, which was challenged by the petitioner in W.P.No.14090/1988 and the court has allowed the said petition on 10.01.1989. 3. Inspite of allowing of the said writ petition, the petitioner service was terminated on 17.04.1989. It was challenged in W.P.No.5040/1989 before the disposal of the writ petition. As against the order of termination petitioner preferred appeal to Joint Director of Schools on 09.05.1989, and the appeal was allowed and the 5th respondent was directed to reinstate the petitioner as Head-Mistress. .4. 5th respondent preferred revision petition to the Government and the revision petition was dismissed on 011. 1992. By G.O.Ms.No.1020 the Education Department, directed the Director of school Education to instruct the 5th respondent to reinstate the petitioner as Head-Mistress of the school as already ordered by the Joint Director of School Education. On the basis of the above said Government Order, 2nd respondent passed the orders on 11. 1992 directing the 5th respondent to reinstate the petitioner as Head-Mistress. Since the 5th respondent refused to take back the petitioner, she was transferred to Sri Arumuga Nadar Girls Higher Secondary School on 13.08.1993 by the order of the 2nd respondent. According to the petitioner the 2nd respondent instructed 5th respondent by the order dated 02.04.1997 to pay backwages due to the petitioner from 10.08.1988 to 12.08.1993 treating the period as period "On Duty". Stating that there was no response from the 5th respondent and referring to number of proceedings initiated by 5th respondent petitioner has filed the writ petition seeking for the relief aforesaid in para 1. 5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the 5th respondent and also the Government Advocate appearing on behalf of respondents 1 to 4. 6. The learned counsel for 5th respondent Mr. V. Selvaraj, would submit that earlier in W.P.No.12914/1989 petitioner has with drawn the writ petition as infructuous and having waived the backwages, it is not open to the petitioner to claim backwages from 10.08.1988 to 12.08.1993. 6. The learned counsel for 5th respondent Mr. V. Selvaraj, would submit that earlier in W.P.No.12914/1989 petitioner has with drawn the writ petition as infructuous and having waived the backwages, it is not open to the petitioner to claim backwages from 10.08.1988 to 12.08.1993. By perusal of type set of papers it comes to be known that the 4th respondent in the letter Na.Ka.No.663/AA2/99 dated 08.04.1999 called upon the 5th respondent to pay backwages to the petitioner for the period from 10.08.1988 to 12.08.1993. The Joint Director of School Education in his proceedings Na.Ka.No.126707/G6/2001, dated 28.08.2002, directed the 5th respondent to pay backwages to the petitioner from 10.08.1988 to 12.08.1993 despite such direction there was no response from the 5th respondent. When the Government has passed the order of reinstatement by virtue of G.O.Ms.No.1020 Educational Department dated 011. 1992. 5th respondent was bound to pay arrears of the salary to the petitioner for the aforesaid period. 7. The contention of the learned counsel for the 5th respondent does not merit any acceptance. Since the Government has passed the order G.O.Ms.No.1020 Education Department dated 011. 1992 setting aside the order of termination and directed reinstatement, there was no necessity for the petitioner to pursue W.P.No.12914/1989. Dismissal of the said writ petition as infructuous would not amount to waiver of backwages. .8. The petitioner has sought for direction to take action against the 5th respondent under Section 12 & 14(2) of the Tamil Nadu Act of 1974. Section 12 of the Tamil Nadu Act 29 of 1974 deals with withdrawal of recognition by any private school which does not comply with any of the provisions of the act or rules made or directions issued there under. Section 14 deals with payment of grant. As per section 14 (2) The Government may withhold permanently or for any specified period the whole part of any grant referred to in sub-section (1) in respect of any private school which does no comply with any of the provisions of the act or rules made or directions issued thereunder. 9. On behalf of the petitioner it was contended that in view of non compliance of the directions to pay backwages period from 10.08.1988 to 12.08.1993. Section 12 and Section 14(2) are to be invoked and seeks direction to the 2nd respondent to initiate action against the 5th respondent. 9. On behalf of the petitioner it was contended that in view of non compliance of the directions to pay backwages period from 10.08.1988 to 12.08.1993. Section 12 and Section 14(2) are to be invoked and seeks direction to the 2nd respondent to initiate action against the 5th respondent. The parties were entangled in series of litigations while so the 5th respondent school might have been under the bonafide impression in not paying the arrears of salary to the petitioner. In facts and circumstances of the case and keeping in view the series of litigation between the parties, the petitioner cannot insist on invoking section 12 and section 14(2) of the Tamil Nadu Act 29 of 1974 against the 5th respondent. 10. In the result the writ petition is partly allowed the 5th respondent is directed to pay backwages to the petitioner from 10.08.1988 to 12.08.1993 within a period of eight weeks. No costs.