HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
K. CHANDRU, J.
M. Muthuswamy & Others
Versus
The Principal Pachaiyappan College Chennai & Others
W.P.Nos.15798 of 2007, 26165 to 26170 of 2012, M.P.Nos.1 and 2 of 2007, M.P.No.1 of 2010 in W.P.Nos.15798 of 2007, M.P.Nos.1 to 1 of 2012 in W.P.Nos.26165 to 26170 of 2012
Decided on: 28-01-2013
Termination - College Lecturers - Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Act, 1976 - Rule 11(1), Rule 11(2)(i), Rule 11(3), Section 14(1)(b), Section 15, Section 16, Section 20, Section 39 - The court dismissed the writ petitions seeking to set aside the termination of college lecturers, holding that the appointments were made on a temporary basis against self-finance courses without following the statutory recruitment process and hence regularisation was not possible.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, college lecturers, sought to set aside their termination, claiming that their appointments were regular and seeking regularisation of their services.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appointments were made on a temporary basis against self-finance courses without following the statutory recruitment process, and hence regularisation was not possible.
Issues: The main issue was whether the college lecturers' appointments could be regularised without following the statutory recruitment process.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appointments were not made in accordance with the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Act, 1976, and regularisation without following the statutory recruitment process was not possible.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions seeking to set aside the termination of college lecturers, holding that the appointments were made on a temporary basis against self-finance courses without following the statutory recruitment process and hence regularisation was not possible.
1. All these Writ Petitions came to be posted on being specially ordered by The Honourable Acting Chief Justice, by order dated 23.1.2013.
2. In W.P.No.15798 of 2007, five petitioners are seeking to set aside the order No. Nil, dated 9.4.2007 passed by the first respondent-Principal, Pachaiyappa's College, Chennai. By the impugned order, the petitioners were informed that the full time Lecturers in the Department of Computer Science and Microbiology would be terminated with effect from 12.4.2007 for the academic year 2006-2007. They were also informed that their names would be recommended to the Management by getting performance report of the respective Heads of Departments for appointment for the year 2007-2008. Challenging the said communication, W.P.No.15798 of 2007 came to be filed.
3. In W.P.No.15798 of 2007, "Notice of Motion" returnable in six weeks, was ordered on 27.4.2007 and interim order of stay was also granted.
4. Aggrieved by the grant of interim order of stay, the respondents 1 and 2 in W.P.No.15798 of 2007 filed M.P.No.1 of 2010 in W.P.No.15798 of 2007, seeking to vacate the said order of interim stay, dated 27.4.2007. Though it was filed as early as in 2010, it has not been taken up for disposal. The affidavit filed in support of the said vacate-stay-petition is sworn to by the then Principal-in-charge of Pachaiyappa's College, Chennai.
5. It is stated in the said affidavit that the Writ Petition is not maintainable and the allegation that the petitioners were working continuously is denied. It is further stated that the petitioners were the Teachers appointed for the self-finance courses conducted in respect of Microbiology and M.Sc. Computer Science and Technology. The said courses were started by the College without any financial aid from the Government. The demand for such courses fluctuated year by year and financial inflow through fee collection does not have stability. B.Sc. Microbiology course was suspended in the year 2000, as there was no demand from the students. The Teachers were appointed only on temporary basis and the salary to the teaching staff was paid on consolidated basis. M.Sc. Computer Science and Technology (5 year in graduate course) was suspended from the academic year 2003-2004, as it has lost its demand from the student community. The remaining years of the said course and the financial inability atleast to meet the salary expenses of the Teachers, are being conducted by the Teachers by paying salary from the Management funds. These courses were initially introduced with a motto to develop the educational standard of the poor and benefit the economically weaker sections of the society. The entire fee collection through the conduct of these courses, is being met only for the maintenance of the laboratories and for paying salary to the staff members. Since the appointments were made only on temporary basis, the appointed staff members have been exempted for the requisite pass in National Eligibility Test (NET) and State Level Eligibility Test (SLET) examinations. The working staff in self-finance courses are being paid 12 months' consolidated salary. The appointments were made on the basis of the conditions laid down by the then Administrator General and Official Trustee (AG & OT) and the order itself states that it is valid for full time Lecturers in self-finance courses for 2006-2007 for the period from 14.6.2006 or from the actual date of joining till the last working day of the College for the academic year 2006-2007 only and it was made clear that it will not confer any right for absorption against any regular vacancy of the Day College, which is covered under the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Act and the Rules thereunder. It was also made clear that the appointment was purely temporary and liable for termination at any time without issuing any prior notice if the individual's services are found unsatisfactory. Though they were initially appointed on consolidated
State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi(3)reported in (2006) 4 SCC 1
Uttaranchal Jal Sansthan v. Laxmi Devi reported in (2009) 7 SCC 205
5. Raghavendra Rao v. State of Karnataka reported in (2009) 3 SCC 250
7. Pinaki Chatterjee v. Union of India reported in (2009) 5 SCC 193
Satya Prakash v. State of Bihar reported in (2010) 4 SCC 179
M.Saravanakumar and others Vs. The Secretary to Government, Education Department, Fort St. George
State of West Bengal v. Banibrata Ghoshreported in (2009) 3 SCC 250
6. Harminder Kaur v. Union of India reported in (2009) 13 SCC 90
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.