Back
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
S. SRIMATHY, J.
N.J. Satheesh Kumar – Petitioner
Versus
The Director of Collegiate Education, Chennai and Others – Respondents
W.P. (MD) Nos. 20722 to 20724 of 2013, M.P. (MD) No. 1 of 2013
Decided On : 05-09-2022
Writ Petition - Termination of Employment - Tamil Nadu Private Colleges Regulation Act, 1976 - Sections 20, 21, 24 - Applicability to Minority Institutions - Right to Administer - Tribunal Jurisdiction - Termination Simpliciter
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners, employed as lecturers in a minority college, were terminated from their services due to disruptive activities and misconduct. The college contended that the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges Regulation Act, 1976 did not apply to minority institutions and the first appeal against termination was before the Bishop. The petitioners challenged the termination, arguing that the Act was applicable and sought relief from the High Court.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the Act was applicable to minority institutions and the Tribunal had jurisdiction to hear second appeals. It also found that the termination was simpliciter and dismissed the writ petitions.
Issues: Applicability of Tamil Nadu Private Colleges Regulation Act, 1976 to minority institutions, Right to Administer, Tribunal Jurisdiction, Termination Simpliciter
Ratio Decidendi: The Act applies to minority institutions, and the Tribunal has jurisdiction to hear second appeals. The termination was found to be simpliciter and not based on misconduct.
Final Decision: The writ petitions were dismissed as devoid of merits.
ORDER :
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 5th respondent in Ref. No. MCC/Appeal No. 3 of 2013, dated 18.11.2013, confirming the order of the 4th respondent in Ref. No. MCC/SFCL/STO-3, dated 12.10.2012, to quash the same and to direct the 4th respondent to reinstate the petitioner in to services with all attendant benefits.
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 5th respondent in Ref. No. MCC/Appeal No. 1 of 2013, dated 18.11.2013, confirming the order of the 4th respondent in Ref. No. MCC/SFCL/STO-1, dated 12.10.2012, to quash the same and to direct the 4th respondent to reinstate the petitioner in to services with all attendant benefits.
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 5th respondent in Ref. No. MCC/Appeal No. 2 of 2013, dated 18.11.2013, confirming the order of the 4th respondent in Ref. No. MCC/SFCL/STO-2, dated 12.10.2012, to quash the same and to direct the 4th respondent to reinstate the petitioner in to services with all attendant benefits.
1. These three Writ Petitions are filed with a similar prayer. The Writ Petition W.P. (MD) No. 20722 of 2013 is filed for issuance of a Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned order passed by the 5th respondent in Ref. No. MCC/Appeal No. 3 of 2013, dated 18.11.2013, confirming the order of the 4th respondent in Ref. No. MCC/SFCL/STO-3, dated 12.10.2012 and to direct the 4th respondent to reinstate the petitioner in to services with all attendant benefits.
2. The Writ Petition W.P. (MD) No. 20723 of 2013 is filed for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned order passed by the 5th respondent in Ref. No. MCC/Appeal No. 1 of 2013, dated 18.11.2013, confirming the order of the 4th respondent in Ref. No. MCC/SFCL/STO-1, dated 12.10.2012 and to direct the 4th respondent to reinstate the petitioner in to services with all attendant benefits.
3. The Writ Petition W.P. (MD) No. 20724 of 2013 is filed for issuance of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to quash the impugned order passed by the 5th respondent in Ref. No. MCC/Appeal No. 2 of 2013, dated 18.11.2013, confirming the order of the 4th respondent in Ref. No. MCC/SFCL/STO-2, dated 12.10.2012 and to direct the 4th respondent to reinstate the petitioner in to services with all attendant benefits.
4. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner in W.P. (MD) No. 20722 of 2013 is qualified M.Sc., M.Phil., in Computer Science and was appointed as Lecturer in Software Engineering in the fourth respondent College on 18.02.2003 and continued up to 31.10.2003. Later on, he was appointed as Guest Lecturer from 15.12.2003 for a period of one year and he was on probation for two years on the permanent basis from 2004. The petitioner has put in 9 years of service and he is the next to the Head of Department and there are 8 other Lecturers apart from the petitioner. The petitioner in W.P. (MD) No. 20723 of 2013 is qualified M.A. M.Phil. M.Ed. D.J. in Tamil and the 3rd respondent had approved the petitioner qualifications from 20.07.1998 vide proceedings dated 04.02.2010, the petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Tamil in the 4th respondent college on 19.07.1998, completed probation in 2 years, had served 14 years, now serving as Head of Department of Tamil and on the date of appointment the petitioner possessed the requisite qualification for being appointed as Lecturer/Assistant Professor. The petitioner in W.P. (MD) No. 20724 of 2013 is qualified M.C.A. M.Phil. and M.Tech. in Computer Science, the 3rd respondent approved the petitioner’s qualification from June
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
