Madras High Court admits challenge to Tamil Nadu law restricting private school property sales

The Madras High Court on Wednesday admitted a writ petition filed by the All India Private Educational Institutions Association (AIPEA) challenging the constitutional validity of Section 30 of the Tamil Nadu Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 2019. This provision imposes restrictions on the alienation of properties belonging to private schools.

A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan granted six weeks to the State government to file its counter affidavit. The petitioner association argued that the provision suffers from legislative incompetence, jurisdictional overreach and usurpation of the powers of civil courts.

Section 30(1) of the Act states that no educational agency shall transfer the property of a private school—by way of sale, exchange, mortgage, charge, pledge, lease, or gift—without prior written permission from the competent authority, which is an official of the school education department. Section 30(2) allows the competent authority to grant permission only if satisfied that the transfer is for furthering the objectives of the school and that the proceeds will be wholly used for that purpose. A proviso mandates hearing the applicant before a decision is taken.

Section 30(3) requires the competent authority to pass an order within 60 days of receiving the application. Section 30(4) declares any transaction made without prior permission null and void.

The AIPEA contended that the provision is a colourable piece of legislation: though it appears to serve educational purposes, it effectively interferes with the right to hold property, enter into contracts, and administer trusts. The association argued that the State lacks legislative competence to impose such restrictions on immovable property transactions.

The petitioner further submitted that the school education department cannot exercise jurisdiction over the property affairs of educational agencies. It argued that only civil courts—not administrative authorities—should determine whether a property transaction furthers the objectives of an educational agency. The association also pointed out that the Act does not provide for a statutory appeal against the competent authority's decision, and urged the court to declare Section 30 ultra vires the Constitution.

The case is expected to be heard next after the State government files its counter affidavit. The outcome could have significant implications for the regulation of private educational institutions in Tamil Nadu.