Madras High Court
Indian Society For Technical ... vs Anna University on 1 April, 2021
WA No. 57 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 01-04-2021
CORAM :
The Honourable Mr. Justice R. Subbiah
and
The Honourable Mr. Justice Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup
W.A. No. 57 of 2021
---
Indian Society for Technical Education
represented by its Executive Secretary
Saheed Jeet Singh Marg
New Delhi - 110 016 .. Appellant
Versus
1. Anna University
represented by its Registrar
Guindy, Chennai - 600 025
2. Dr. T.R. Natesan
Advisor
Centre for Engineering Partnership
Anna University
Guindy, Chennai - 600 025
(R2 deleted as per Order dated
14.08.2018 in WMP No. 11329 of 2018
in WP No. 18627 of 2004) .. Respondents
Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the Order
dated 03.03.2020 passed in WP No. 18627 of 2004 on the file of this Court.
For Appellant : Ms. A. Ajimath Begum
For Respondent : Mr. P.H. Aravindh Pandian
Additional Advocate General
assisted by Mr. L.P. Shanmuga Sundaram for R1
http://www.judis.nic.in
1/11
WA No. 57 of 2021
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was delivered by R. Subbiah, J)
This appeal has been filed as against the order dated 03.03.2020 passed
by the learned single Judge in WP No. 18627 of 2004.
2. The said writ petition has been filed to quash the proceedings of
the first respondent viz., The Registrar, Anna University dated 22.06.2004 and
consequently forbear the respondents from interfering with the possession and
enjoyment of the land comprised in T.S No. 2A, Block No.8, Kottur Village,
Chennai and the building constructed thereon by adhering to the terms and
conditions of the M.O.U. dated 04.09.1992.
3. By the order dated 03.03.2020, the learned single Judge dismissed
the Writ Petition. Aggrieved over the same, the present writ appeal has been
filed by Dr. A. Kalanidhi, representing himself as the authorised signatory of
the appellant Society along with a petition for interim stay of operation of the
order passed by the learned single Judge on 03.03.2020.
4. When the matter came up for hearing on 02.02.2021, it was
brought to the notice of this Court by Mr. L.P. Shanmuga Sundaram, the
learned counsel appearing for first respondent that Anna University has
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA No. 57 of 2021
received a letter dated 23.01.2021 from Indian Society for Technical Education
that they have not authorised Dr. A. Kalanidhi to file this appeal at all and he
portrayed himself as the authorised signatory of the appellant and filed the
present writ appeal. It was also submitted that the said Dr. Kalanidhi has
played fraud on this Court. In the letter dated 23.01.2021, the Executive
Secretary of Indian Society for Technical Education has stated thus:-
"I am surprised to learn that Dr. A. Kalanidhi has filed
W.A. (SR) No. 66707/20, subsequently numbered as W.A. No.
57 of 2021 against W.P. No. 18627 of 2004 on behalf of
Indian Society for Technical Education represented by its
Executive Secretary, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg claiming that he
is the authorised signatory of the Indian Society for Technical
Education.
I make it clear that neither myself nor the President nor
any competent person of Indian Society for Technical
Education, New Delhi authorised Dr.A. Kalanidhi to file the
above writ appeal.
Dr. A. Kalanidhi has taken a specific stand before the
Honourable High Court, Madras which is against the interest
of Indian Society for Technical Education, New Delhi as well
as ISTE, Tamil Nadu & Pondicherry Section making a false
claim that the Professional Centre was constructed by Building
Committee and the income should go to the Building
Committee. He has been right from the inception of the
Professional Centre, misappropriating the income from the
Professional Centre which belongs to ISTE. He initially
claimed that the Professional Centre belongs to the
Professional Centre Building Committee. Later, he claimed
that the ISTE Professional Centre belongs to ISTE Professional
Centre Trust. Making such false claim, he has been
misappropriating the income from the ISTE Professional
Centre which was constructed by the ISTE, Tamil Nadu and
Pondicherry Section on the site allotted by Anna University for
the benefit of ISTE, Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry Section.
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA No. 57 of 2021
Dr. A. Kalanidhi has prevented the ISTE, Tamil Nadu
and Pondicherry Section from having its professional centre in
the new building which was constructed by the ISTE for the
benefit of Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry Section. In violation of
the conditions imposed by Anna University he has leased ISTE
building to various commercial institutions.
For arguing W.P. No. 18627 of 2004 when it came up
for final hearing before the learned single Judge, the Indian
Society for Technical Education engaged M/s. Muthumani
Doraisami and Kandhan Duraisami, Advocates to represent
ISTE as its Counsel.
The above Writ Appeal has been filed by Dr.A.
Kalanidhi with ulterior motive without any authority from
Indian Society for Technical Education, New Delhi. Only to
perpetuate the continuous misrepresentation of the income of
ISTE Professional Centre, he has filed the above Writ Appeal
without any authority.
I request you to take appropriate steps for placing the
correct facts before the Honourable Division Bench. We also
request you to take necessary steps for prosecuting Dr. A.
Kalanidhi not only for falsely claiming that he has been
authorised to file the above writ appeal on behalf of the Indian
Society for Technical Education, New Delhi but also for
continuous misrepresentation of the income of the Professional
Centre established for the benefit of ISTE, Tamil Nadu and
Pondicherry Section on the land assigned by Anna University,
subject to certain conditions."
5. In the light of the above letter dated 23.01.2021 and by taking
note of the submission made before this Court on 02.02.2021, this Court
directed Dr. Kalanidhi to be present in the Court on 10.02.2021.
6. On 10.02.2021, when the writ appeal was taken up for hearing,
Dr.Kalanidhi did not appear, as directed. However, the learned counsel for the
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA No. 57 of 2021
appellant submitted that she was not in a position to communicate the order
passed by this Court on 02.02.2021 and therefore sought time for appearance
of Dr. Kalanidhi. Accordingly, the hearing of the writ appeal was adjourned to
16.02.2021 for appearance of Dr. Kalanidhi.
7. Even on 16.02.2021, Dr. Kalanidhi did not appear before this
Court. Therefore, bailable warrant was issued to secure his presence and to
produce him before this Court on 25.02.2021.
8. On 25.02.2021, Dr. Kalanidhi appeared before this Court and
sought unconditional apology. He also filed a detailed affidavit.
9. Mr. Viduthalai, learned Senior Counsel, who appeared for the
appellant on 25.02.2021, submitted that the appellant had instructed to file an
appeal as against the order passed by the learned single Judge. The appellant
ought to have filed this appeal after obtaining leave of this Court as a third
party. The counsel, out of ignorance, filed the present appeal without
obtaining leave. The learned Senior counsel for the appellant also submitted
that he filed the appeal only as an authorised signatory of Indian Society
Professional Centre. He has also produced document to show that Indian
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA No. 57 of 2021
Society Professional Centre had authorised the appellant to file this appeal and
it will show the appellant intended to file an appeal for and on behalf of the
Professional Centre only.
10. In the affidavit, Dr.Kalanidhi has stated that he was in Texas,
United States of America and he came to know about the order passed by this
Court through the newspaper, as communicated by his friends. Immediately,
he departed from Texas, United States of America on 22.02.2021 and reached
Chennai on the night of 23.02.2021. He has further stated that he was
planning to see his daughter and grand daughter in the month of January 2021,
but due to the travel restrictions owing to Covid-19 Pandemic, he booked ticket
only on 02.02.2021, departed Chennai on 10.02.2021 and reached the
residence of his daughter at Chicago on 11.02.2021. However, after hearing
the order passed by this Court, he immediately rushed to Chennai on
23.02.2021, as mentioned above. Dr.Kalanidhi has further stated in the
affidavit that he was the Managing Trustee of IST Professional Centre. He was
not aware of the fact that Indian Society for Technical Education has filed this
appeal. Due to inadvertence and lack of communication between himself and
his lawyer, the appeal was filed. Thus he sought for unconditional apology for
having filed this appeal representing the Indian Society for Technical
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA No. 57 of 2021
Education.
11. The learned counsel for the appellant has also filed a supporting
affidavit to the following effect:
"4. I further state that during Covid-Pandemic myself
and client were unable to meet in person and the instruction
was received over phone and mail and the appeal was filed.
Due to oversight the cause title of the appeal is not properly
stated and it was accidental. Instead of filing the appeal in the
capacity of authorised signatory to the Indian Society
Professional Centre, the appeal was filed on the name of Indian
Society Technical Centre, which was the writ petitioner, by
mistake. I have no intention of misleading the Court. I filed
authorisation letter of Mr. Dr. A. Kalanithi representing the
Indian Society for Professional Centre at the time of filing and
also he had signed in the capacity of same. Hence, the mistake
in cause title occurred only due to inadvertence. The affidavit
filed by Dr. A. Kalanidhi is true and correct and due to lack of
communication between me and him.
5. In the above circumstances, Mr. Dr. Kalanidhi
filed in his affidavit that he is withdrawing the appeal. Hence,
I may be permitted to withdraw the appeal accepting the
supporting affidavit and thus render justice.
12. The learned counsel for the first respondent submitted that the
appellant has purposefully filed the appeal knowing fully well about the
consequences that may flow therefrom. The appellant has played a fraud on
this Court by misrepresentation. Therefore, he opposed the appellant
withdrawing the present Appeal.
13. Mr. Doraisamy, learned Senior counsel, who appeared for the Writ
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA No. 57 of 2021
Petitioner before the learned single Judge, by placing reliance on the counter
affidavit filed in this writ appeal by the Registrar, Anna University, has
submitted that Dr. A. Kalanidhi has deliberately filed the Writ Appeal to
mislead this Court. Therefore, he prayed this Court to permit Anna Universityt
o launch prosecution against Dr. A. Kalanidhi.
14. Mr. Shanmuga Sundaram, learned counsel appearing for Anna
Unviersity in this appeal also reiterated his submission that for having filed the
appeal with misrepresentation, Dr. Kalanidhi has to be criminally prosecuted.
He therefore prayed this Court to permit Anna University to take appropriate
action to launch prosecution as against Dr. Kalanidhi.
15. We have heard the counsel on either side and have gone through
the material records placed. We are of the opinion that when it was brought to
the notice of this Court that Dr. Kalanidhi was not authorised to file an appeal
on behalf of Indian Society for Technical Education, we have issued notice to
Dr.Kalanidhi to seek his response. Subsequently, we have also issued Bailable
warrant to him and he has also appeared before this Court. Dr. Kalanidhi has
also filed an affidavit tendering unconditional apology. The counsel engaged by
Dr. Kalanidhi has also filed a supporting affidavit, which we have taken on
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA No. 57 of 2021
record. Thus, it is clear that the appeal has been erroneously filed by
Dr.Kalanidhi without being authorised by the appellant Society. In such
circumstances, we are of the view that the Writ Appeal is not maintainable
inasmuch as Dr. Kalanidhi is a third party to the writ proceedings. In such
circumstances, we are not inclined to issue any direction in this writ appeal
directing Dr. Kalanidhi to vacate the property or to grant permission to Anna
University to launch prosecution as against Dr. Kalanidhi. We are also
informed that already a Civil Case is pending and therefore, it is left open to
the parties to agitate their right in the Civil Proceedings. At the same time, we
are also opinion that there is a mistake on the part of the counsel also in filing
the present appeal without seeking leave of this Court. The haste with which
the writ appeal was filed without verifying the array of the parties to the writ
petition is to be deprecated. In any event, taking note of the unconditional
apology tendered by the appellant, we are of the view that the writ appeal has
to be dismissed as withdrawn and no further order is required to be passed in
this writ appeal.
16. In the result, we dismiss the writ appeal as withdrawn. No costs.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition (s) is/are closed.
(R.P.S.J.,) (S.K.K.J.,)
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA No. 57 of 2021
01-04-2021
rsh
To
The Registrar
Anna University
Guindy, Chennai - 600 025
http://www.judis.nic.in
WA No. 57 of 2021
R. Subbiah, J
and
Sathi Kumar Sukumara Kurup, J
rsh
W.A. No. 57 of 2021
01-04-2021
http://www.judis.nic.in
