JUDGMENT :- 1. The petitioner who was working as a Secretary of National (N.V.S.) Aided Primary School at Tharangapadi, filed the present writ petition, seeking to challenge an order dated 29.12.2010 passed by the third respondent, District Elementary Educational Officer, and seeks to set aside the same with a further direction to the respondents to pay the Grant in Aid towards the salary of teachers and other staff and also to approve the appointment of the petitioner as a Secondary Grade Assistant as ordered in W.P.No.348 of 2008. 2. By the impugned order, the third respondent informed the petitioner that since the Secretary of the School did not adhere to the rules framed under the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools Regulations Act, 1973 and the rules made thereunder, the direct payment system was resorted to for three months from September, 2010. Subsequently, the petitioner had claimed Secretaryship of the School management. But for renewing the school committee, appropriate recommendation from the Additional Assistant Educational Officer was not sent. The petitioner had obtained B.Ed degree from the institution which was not recognised by the U.G.C and also had appointed himself as a Secondary Grade Assistant. Despite the directions by the department, he had not cancelled the said appointment and since he was continuing to function disregarding the Act and Rules, the fourth respondent was directed to draw pay for teachers and disburse the same to the teachers directly. 3. When the writ petition came up on 14.2.2011, this court had directed the learned Government Advocate to take instructions from the respondents. On notice from this court, the third respondent has filed a counter affidavit, dated 15.2.2011. 4. The case projected by the petitioner was that the petitioner earlier filed W.P.No.348 of 2008, seeking to challenge an order dated 18.10.2007 issued by the fourth respondent and after setting aside the same, sought for approval of appointment of the petitioner as a Graduate teacher appointed against secondary grade assistant vacancy on 21.3.2001. In that writ petition, this court by an order, dated 18.2.2010, in paragraph 4 had passed the following order: "4. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents also filed their counter. In the said counter, at para 6 also, it is found that the Government has given approval to all those appointments made during the period from 19.05.1998 to 29.06.2001 by issuing G.O.No.150 dated 02.07.2007. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents also filed their counter. In the said counter, at para 6 also, it is found that the Government has given approval to all those appointments made during the period from 19.05.1998 to 29.06.2001 by issuing G.O.No.150 dated 02.07.2007. Whileso, the refusal of the respondents in not approving the case of the petitioner, since his appointment also falls on 21.03.2001, which is also coming within the cut of date, is not sustainable in the eye of law. Since, the petitioner was working from 2001 without salary, this court directs the respondents to approve the appointment of the petitioner and also to pay the salary within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. No costs." 5. It must be noted that the petitioner was the Secretary of the school agency. He himself had appointed himself in the said school. But subsequent to the direction issued by this court, a show cause notice was given to the petitioner on 30.8.2010 stating that B.Ed degree was obtained by him from the University which was not recognised by the UGC and that he had also not followed the relevant rules in filling up the post. By a further memo, dated 20.9.2010, it was informed that the petitioner being the Secretary of the School had given it in writing that he will abide by the Act, Rules and the order of the Government from time to time. While filling up the vacancies for teachers for classes 1 to 5 of primary school, necessary ratio of male and female teachers were not followed and that contrary to the guidelines, male teacher was appointed. When the show cause notice was given, the petitioner had claimed that he had obtained B.Ed degree from Bharathiya Shiksha Parishad in Uttar Pradesh and that institute was recognised by the UGC. With reference to not adhering to the Government G.O.Ms.No.197, School Education Department, dated 21.7.2000, the ratio between male and female teachers, the petitioner did not give any explanation. Since his action was contrary to Section 14 (2), his proposal cannot be accepted. Further, the petitioner school also did not make appropriate renewal for constitution of school committee. It was also stated that the building licence, health certificate were not obtained. Therefore, the direct payment system was resorted to. 6. Since his action was contrary to Section 14 (2), his proposal cannot be accepted. Further, the petitioner school also did not make appropriate renewal for constitution of school committee. It was also stated that the building licence, health certificate were not obtained. Therefore, the direct payment system was resorted to. 6. In the counter affidavit, it was stated that as against the order passed by this court in W.P.No.348 of 2008, a writ appeal has been filed to stay further proceedings of the order. It was also stated that there is no vacancy for the post of the Secondary Grade Assistant as it was found in excess vide G.O.Ms.No.525, School Education Department, dated 19.12.1997. With reference to the direct payment system, the petitioner has no case to challenge. If there are any violations or perversion of procedure, the authorities are empowered to resort to direct payment system. Since cent per cent of the salary of teachers and non teaching staff are paid by the Government and Annexure 3 read with Rule 19 enables the department to make direct payment to teachers and under Section 14(2), if the school did not comply with the provisions of the Act or rules or direction, they are entitled to withhold the grant. The petitioner had completely violated in the matter of appointment of himself as the Secondary Grade Assistant without adhering to the norms prescribed by the Government. 7. It is one thing to state that a person is qualified to hold the post and it is another thing to contend that he can appoint himself as a teacher being the Secretary of the School. Admittedly, the petitioner school is a non minority school. In the matter of the filling up the post, one has to follow the Government guidelines which has not been done by the petitioner. Secondly, his claim that Bharathiya Shiksha Parishad was recognised by the UGC is highly contentious as it is a subject matter of litigation before the Civil Court in the Uttar Pradesh. In any event, since the impugned order only relates to direct payment, this court is not inclined to interfere with the same as the petitioner has no vested interest in claiming Government grant to pay it to teachers. In any event, since the impugned order only relates to direct payment, this court is not inclined to interfere with the same as the petitioner has no vested interest in claiming Government grant to pay it to teachers. With reference to the direction issued in W.P.No.348 of 2008, as it is stated that it is the subject matter of writ appeal, this court is not inclined to deal with the same in this writ petition. The petitioner has to work out his right in the appropriate forum. Hence the writ petition will stand dismissed. However, there will be no order as to cost. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions stand closed.