BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 11.12.2025

CORAM:

THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE R.VIJAYAKUMAR

and

W.M.P(MD)Nos.24545 to 24547 of 2025

Sivaranjani ... Petitioner

Vs.

1. The Secretary to the Government,

Department of Higher Education,

Secretariat,

Fort St George,

Chennai 600 009.

2. The Director of Collegiate Education,

9th Floor, EVK Sampath Buildings College Road,

Chennai 600 006. 3. The Secretary,

The University Grants Commission,

Bahadurshah Zafar Marg,

New Delhi 110 002.

4. The Vice-Chancellor,

Mother Teresa Women's University,

Kodaikanal - 624 101.,

5. The Registrar,

Mother Teresa Women's University,

Kodaikanal - 624 101,

Dindigul District.

6. The Dean-Research, Mother Teresa Women's University, Kodaikanal - 624 101, Dindigul District. 7. C. Jeyabharathi, Computer Instructor Grade – I, Government Higher Secondary School, Thaliyuthu, Dindigul District.

8. S. Vimala, Professor and Head, Department of Computer Science Mother Teresa Women's University, Kodaikanal - 624 101. ... Respondents Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the Impugned Order in Lr.No.PHDCS19P628/WU/Dean/2025 dated 17.06.2025 on the file of the Respondent No.6 and to quash the same as illegal and consequentially for a direction, directing the Respondent Nos. 4 and 6 to permit the Petitioner to continue and complete her doctoral research under the supervision of her original supervisor the Respondent No.7, and a co-supervisor.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Mahaboob Fazil M/s.Roy and Roy Associates For R1 and R2 : Mr.N.Satheesh Kumar Additional Government Pleader For R3, R6 & R8 : Awake Notice For R4 & R5 : Mr.N.Shanmugaselvan For R7 : No Appearance

ORDER

The present writ petition has been filed seeking to challenge the order passed by the 6^th respondent on 17.06.2025, wherein a new research supervisor was appointed to the writ petitioner.

2. The writ petitioner has registered herself for Ph.D (Part-Time) in Computer Science on 21.09.2019 at the 5^th respondent university. At the time of the registration, the 7^th respondent was allotted as her research supervisor. In the year 2021, the 7^th respondent got relieved from the post of Assistant Supervisor & Head, PG Department of Computer Science, Arulmigu Palaniandavar Arts College for Women, Palani and she got appointed as a Computer Instructor Grade – I, Government Higher Secondary School, Thalaiyuthu.

3. At that point of time, the respondent university issued a communication on 19.03.2021, giving an option to the writ petitioner either to retain the 7^th respondent as the research supervisor or to continue with the some other supervisor. The petitioner herein continued with the 7^th respondent as her research supervisor. On 09.03.2023, the 8^th respondent was appointed as a co-guide for the writ petitioner along with the 7^th respondent.

4. The communication dated 09.03.2023 has not been challenged by the writ petitioner. The present impugned order has been passed on 17.06.2025 removing the 7^th respondent from the post of research supervisor and appointing the 8^th respondent as a research supervisor.

This order is put to challenge in the present writ petition.

5. According to the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner, since option was given to the writ petitioner in the year 2021, she had continued to pursue her mentorship with the 7^th respondent as her research supervisor. Suddenly, in the year 2025, the 7^th respondent was recalled from the post of research supervisor and the 8^th respondent has been appointed and this would affect her continuation of the Ph.D course. 6. She further apprehended that the reports that she would have submitted to the 7^th respondent between 2021- 2025 are not likely to take into account by the respondent university.

7. Per contra, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent university, relying upon the regulations, submitted that in case if the research superv