The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Act, 1976 and the Rules framed thereunder provide a complete code for the establishment, administration, and appointment of staff in private colleges, and do not mandate seeking prior permission for filling up vacant posts in a Private Aided College.

N. Paul Vasanthakumar, J.

1. This writ appeal is preferred against the order made in W.P.No.6811 of 2000 dated 25.6.2009, insofar as not deciding the issue raised by the appellant, viz., whether prior permission for filling up the sanctioned vacant post in appellant's Aided College is required or not.

2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of this writ appeal are as follows:

(a) Nehru Memorial College was established in the year 1967 at Puthanampatti, Tiruchirapalli District, which is affiliated to Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirapalli. It is an Aided Private College, coming within the purview of the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Act, 1976 and the Rules framed thereunder (hereinafter referred to as 'Act' and 'Rules').

(b) The College is conducting UG and PG courses and number of teaching staff sanctioned to aided courses in the College is 37 and the sanctioned strength of nonteaching staff is 33. Some courses are conducted on self-financing basis.

(c) The College being a Private Aided College as per the provisions of the Act, a College Committee was constituted for its administration. As per Rule 11(1) of the Rules, every year the Director of Collegiate Education is to fix the staff strength for aided courses and the College Committee being the appointing authority, has to fill up the vacancies, in terms of the provisions of the Act and Rules.

(d) The staff strength of the College is fixed every year based on the workload/number of periods available in each Department of Aided courses and sections. The workload norms are fixed by the Committee called 'Workload Norms Committee' consisted of three Vice Chancellors; the Deputy Secretary to Finance Department, Government of Tamil Nadu; and the Director of Collegiate Education, Chennai. As per the said norms fixed by the said Committee dated 8.2.1994, the College is entitled to get larger number of posts viz., 65 for the year 1999-2000, though the post sanctioned was 50 from 29.10.1984.

(e) Out of the said sanctioned posts, several teaching posts became vacant due to death, migration, resignation, retirement and promotion. Some of the posts are lying vacant since 1991 and only six posts were allowed to be filled up during 1995.

(f) The contention of the respondent Department is that for filling up the vacant sanctioned posts, prior permission from the Department/Director is required and by virtue of that process, the College had been forced to wait endlessly for the orders of the Director of Collegiate Education. The second respondent/Director of Collegiate Education was furnished with students strength of the College every year in prescribed format, containing all relevant information such as student strength, staff strength, vacancy, number of periods available, the reason for vacancy, etc. In the salary bill forwarded to the Regional Director of Collegiate Education also, the said facts are revealed every month.

(g) The second respondent by proceeding dated 22.12.1995 permitted to fill up six out of 16 permanent vacancies that have arisen as a result of death, migration, resignation, retirement, promotion, etc. Subsequently, by a common proceeding dated 13.1.1998, permission to fill up 75% of vacancies that may arise due to the said reasons was granted. The said permission was specifically stated to be valid up to 30.4.1998 and it was informed that if there was failure to fill up such posts, the college should send fresh proposal and get the orders renewed.

(h) Again by order dated 28.10.1999 the second respondent granted permission to fill up certain vacancies in sanctioned posts. However, by order dated 23.11.1999, the second respondent issued another order not to fill up one post each in Economics and Zoology Departments, until further orders. Another communication was issued by the third respondent on 8.12.1993, based on the telephonic instruction said to have been given by the second respondent not to fill up 13 vacancies without stating any reas