Maintainability of appeal filed to Government.

S. Padmanabhan, J.

1. This writ appeal has been filed by Dr. Madan Mohan Rao against the judgment of V. Ramaswami, J. dismissing W.P. No. 2613 of 1977. The appellant was, the Principal of Sir Theagaraya College, Madras. On 26th May, 1975 as many as twelve charges were framed against him and he was called upon to submit his explanation thereto. The appellant filed, his explanation on 1st July, 1975. Subsequently, there were certain proceedings between the appellant and the respondent No. 2 with which we are not very much concerned in this writ appeal. On 1st May, 1976, the appellant was served with notice of the enquiry to be held on 3rd May, 1976. Since the appellant was absent the enquiry was adjourned to 7th May, 1976. Even then the appellant was absent. Thereafter on 7th May, 1976, the College Committee found that the charges against the appellant were proved, and dismissed the appellant from service. Against the dismissal order the appellant preferred an appeal to the Government on 17th May, 1976. On 23rd July, 1977, the Government by its order impugned in the writ petition dismissed the appeal. The appellant then preferred W.P. No. 2513 of 1977, before this Court and V. Ramaswami, J., dismissed the writ petition by his order, dated 24th August, 1978. The learned Judge held that the appeal preferred by the appellant before the Government was not maintainable as by the time the appellant preferred the appeal, the appellate authority under the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Act, 1976 (referred to as the Act) had not been constituted. The appeal preferred by the appellant before the Government was therefore an ineffective appeal. The law applicable to the case was that of master and servant and not the provisions of the Act.

2. Mr. Chidambaram, the learned Counsel for the appellant raised the following contentions: (1) The learned Judge committed an error in holding that the appeal preferred by the appellant before the Government was not maintainable as the appellate authority under the Act had not been constituted. According to the learned Counsel, the Government promulgated the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Ordinance, 1975, which came into force on 21st November, 1975. That was followed by the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Ordinance, 1976. Section 1(4) of the 1976 Ordinance stated that it shall be deemed to have come into force on the 21st November, 1975. The 1976 Ordinance repealed the 1975 Ordinance. Finally, the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Act, 1976 was passed. The learned Counsel for the appellant pointed out that Section 19 of the Ordinance was the same as Section 19 of the Act. As regards Section 20 of the Act it included only an additional explanation to the effect that the expression 'order' includes any order made on or after the date of commencement of the Act in any disciplinary proceeding which was pending on that date. Section 20 of the Act conferred a power on a teacher or other person employed in a private college who had been dismissed, removed or reduced in rank or whose appointment was otherwise terminated, to prefer an appeal to such authority or officer as may be prescribed. The right of appeal is a vested right. No doubt, the appellate authority was constituted only on 25th June, 1976. However, the fact the appellate authority was constituted only subsequently cannot take away the right of appeal granted to a teacher of a private college whose services were terminated to prefer an appeal to the appellate authority. In this case, the appellant had preferred the appeal on 17th May, 1976 to the Government which itself was notified to be the appellate authority under the Act. The Government did not choose to dismiss the appeal filed by the appellant on 17th May, 1976 on the ground that it had no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal under the Act. Consequently, when the Government was notified to be the appellate authority under the Act on 25th June, 1976, t