IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.SURESH KUMAR, C.SARAVANAN, JJ.
The Government of Tamil Nadu - Appellant
Versus
Ramawamy Tamil College, Represented by its Secretary, Mr.PR.Veerappan - Respondent
W.A.No.2348 of 2024 and C.M.P.No.16529 of 2024
Decided on : 27-01-2025
JUDGMENT :
R.SURESH KUMAR, J.
This intra Court appeal has been directed against the order passed by the writ Court dated 21.12.2023 in W.P.No.29647 of 2023.
2. That the respondent/writ petitioner is a Private Aided College, namely, Ramasamy Tamil College at Karaikudi. It has got various sanctioned teaching and non-teaching posts.
3. Insofar as non-teaching posts are concerned, there are four Group-D posts called one Gardner, one Watchman, one Scavenger and one Sweeper. Those posts since have become vacant, in order to fill-up these posts, the College Management sought permission from the appellant Department on 17.08.2022, having considered the said request made by the College, the Directorate of Collegiate Education, i.e., second appellant, vide its communication dated 03.11.2022 had accorded permission to fill-up these posts.
4. Pursuant to such permission granted by the concerned authority, the appointment orders were issued to fill-up the three posts on 19.04.2023 and one post on 28.04.2023, therefore, all together all the four posts have been filled up by two separate orders.
5. After having filled up these posts, proposal had been sent on 22.05.2023 by the College Management to the second appellant, i.e., the Director of Collegiate Education for giving such approval.
6. However, the second appellant had rejected the said proposal for giving approval by citing the reason that, as per the Government Order in G.O.(Ms)No.49, Personnel and Administrative Reforms (F) Department dated 14.05.2002, these kind of Group-D posts shall not be filled up on permanent basis instead as per the decision taken by the Government which is reflected in G.O.(Ms)No.49, these Group-D posts shall be engaged by outsourcing on private basis.
7. The said reason has been given in the rejection order, challenging the same, the College Management had approached this Court seeking prayer of writ of declaration to declare that, G.O.(Ms)No.49 dated 14.05.2002 and the consequential letter dated 05.06.2023 issued by the first respondent in the writ petition and the consequential letter issued by the third respondent in the writ petition dated 19.09.2023 are not applicable or has no relevancy to the Aided Private Colleges to appoint Group-D Employees and consequently direct the third respondent in the writ petition to grant approval for the appointment of Group-D Employees, namely, Gardener, Watchman, Sweeper and Scavenger who had already been appointed in the sanctioned vacancies.
8. The said prayer having been considered, the writ Court by order dated 21.12.2023 has allowed the said writ petition and in fact the learned Judge has gone to the extent of quashing G.O.(Ms)No.49 itself along with the consequent and connected communications as sought for in the prayer of the writ petition.
9. Even though a writ of declaration has been sought to declare that G.O.(Ms)No.49 will have no application to the Private Aided Institutions like the respondent/writ petitioner College, the writ Court has reasons which has been recorded in the order and quashed G.O.(Ms)No.49 dated 14.05.2002.
10. Assailing the said order, Mr.D.Ravichandar, learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the appellants would contend that, insofar as the policy decision that has been taken by the Government which is reflected in G.O.(Ms)No.49 is concerned, in order to streamline the heavy expenditure being incurred by the Government for these kind of Group-D posts, the Expenditure Reforms Commission has been appointed to make a recommendation on outsourcing of services of certain employees in the Government Department.
11. The Government also constituted the Staff and Expenditure Reforms Commission to examine the scope for curtailing avoidable expenditure in the administration. The Commission has submitted an interim report to the Government. One of the recommendations of the commission is that, it relates to outsourcing of services like Sweeping, Scavenging, Cleaning, Watch and ward etc., therefore, the
Executive orders cannot override statutory provisions governing Private Aided Educational Institutions, affirming their right to fill Group-D posts.
Amendments to filling rules for Group D posts not retrospective; pre-amendment vacancies filled per prior permission upheld.
The right to receive aid for minority institutions is not fundamental and can be restricted based on financial considerations and policy decisions regarding staff positions.
The court affirmed that sanctioned posts must be honored, and government orders restricting salary payments to non-teaching staff in private aided institutions are invalid.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of the Rajasthan Voluntarily Rural Education Service Rules, 2010, specifically Rule 4 and Rule 5, in determining....
The court upheld that the appointments made before changes in recruitment policy must be considered valid under the laws in effect at that time, emphasizing the integrity of the selection process.
Transfer orders are a condition of service and can be modified in public interest without requiring reasons in the order.
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.