Madras High Court
S.Stephen vs The Director Of Collegiate ... on 2 December, 2022
1 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 02.12.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
W.P.(MD)No.23903 of 2022 and
W.M.P.(MD)Nos.17970 & 17971 of 2022
S.Stephen ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Director of Collegiate Education,
Institute of Advanced Studies in Education Campus,
No. 577, Anna Salai,
Saidapet,
Chennai-600 015.
2. The Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education,
Madurai Region,
Palam Station Road,
Madurai-625 002
3. The Governing Council of The American College,
Rep by its President / Bishop of
Madurai-Ramnad Diocese,
AVH Building, 1st Floor,
No. 162, East Veli Street,
Madurai-625 001.
4. The Secretary,
The Governing Council of The American College,
The American College,
Madurai-625 002.
5. The American College,
Rep by its Principal,
Madurai-625 002.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/15
2 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
6. The Registrar,
Madurai Kamaraj University,
Palkalai Nagar,
Madurai-625 021.
7. Dr.M.Davamani Christober,
Associate Professor and Principal of
The American College and
Appointee as Head of PG and
Research Department of Mathematics,
The American College,
Madurai-625 002. ... Respondents
Prayer: Writ petition is filed under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, to issue a Writ of Certiorarified
Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the Order
No.PO/06/2022/GC-363/R.No.09/06/2022 dated 15.06.2022
passed by the 4th respondent and quash the same and
consequently direct respondents 3 and 4 to re-designate the
petitioner as the Head of the P.G. Department of Mathematics,
The American College, Madurai, from 15.6.2022 within the
time limit that may be stipulated by this Court.
For Petitioner : Mr.Raguvaran Gopalan
For R-1 & R-2 : Mr.N.Sathees Kumar,
Additional Government Pleader.
For R-3 to R-5
& R-7 : Mr.M.Ajmal Khan,
Senior Counsel,
for M/s.Ajmal Associates.
For R-6 : Mr.T.Sakthikumaran
***
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/15
3 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
ORDER
Heard the learned counsel appearing for the writ
petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader
appearing for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Senior
counsel appearing for respondents 3 to 5 and 7 and the
learned counsel appearing for the sixth respondent.
2. The writ petitioner joined The American college,
Madurai as Assistant Professor in the year 1987. He became
an Associate Professor. He has put in 35 years of service. The
petitioner was appointed as Head of the Post-Graduate
Department of Mathematics on 01.06.2018. While so, without
cancelling the petitioner's order of appointment or even notice
to him, the seventh respondent had been appointed as the
Head of Post-Graduate Research Department (Maths) in The
American College with effect from 15.06.2022. The petitioner
gave representation to the Regional Joint Director, Madurai
Region and copies were marked to various authorities
including the private respondents herein. Since it was not
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
considered, the present writ petition came to be filed.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the writ
petitioner reiterated all the contentions set out in the affidavit
filed in support of the writ petition and called upon this Court
to interfere in the matter.
4. The private respondents have filed counter
affidavit. The learned Senior counsel took me through its
contents. The primary contention of the learned Senior
counsel is that The American College has two Post-Graduate
Departments in Mathematics. The Post-Graduate department
has been recognised as a research centre where the students
can be guided to obtain Ph.D. in Mathematics. The writ
petitioner is not having any doctorate. On the other hand, the
seventh respondent is holding Doctorate in Mathematics. The
learned Senior counsel submitted that during the last four
years, no student had joined for Ph.D. Degree in Mathematics
and that is why the governing council in its wisdom appointed
the seventh respondent as Head. The learned Senior counsel
submitted that the writ petitioner can as well be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
accommodated as the Head of U.G. Department
(Mathematics). He submitted that this post does not carry any
extra emolument or rank. Since the petitioner is going to be
accommodated in U.G. Department, he need not have any real
cause for grievance. In any event, the appointment was made
in the best interest of the institution and students. According
to the learned Senior counsel, The impugned order does not
call for any interference.
5. I carefully considered the rival contentions and
went through the materials on record.
6. The issue regarding the appointment of the Head of
the Department is governed by G.O.No.1785 Education (H-3)
Department dated 05.12.1988. Clause 4 (vii) is as follows:-
“ The Senior most person in the
Department of College irrespective of his Ph.D.
Qualifications will be nominated and designated
as “Senior Lecturer Selection Grade Lecturer
Reader and Head of Department” by the Director
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
6 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
of Collegiate Education and that no special pay
will be allowed to that post. ”
This clause was interpreted and construed in quite a few
decisions of this Court. One such decision in W.P.(MD)No.
7082 of 2011 ( S.Kuppusamy V. The Director of
Collegiate Education, Chennai and three others ) has
been enclosed in the typed set of papers. Paragraph Nos.5, 8
and 9 of the said order dated 08.02.2011 read as follows:-
5.This court had rejected the case of the
petitioner by an order dated 24.9.2007 and in
paragraphs 7 and 14, it was observed as follows:
"7....This Court dealt with an identical situation in
the judgment reported in 1998 (1) CTC 609
[Dr.Mrs.Shams V. The Commissioner of Collegiate
Education, Madras and others] wherein it was held
that enforcement of G.O.Ms.No.1785 Education
Department dated 05.12.1988 is applicable to
minority institutions also and this Court gave a
direction to fill up the post on seniority basis. The
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
7 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
above said matter was taken on appeal and the
Division Bench by its judgment reported in 2001
(2) CTC 84 [ The Principal and Secretary, Madras
Christian College, Madras and another V. Dr.(Mrs.)
Shams and another ] dismissed the writ appeal and
the relevant passages found in paragraphs 10 to 12
& 14 of the said judgment are usefully extracted
below:
Para 10."From the above passage, it is clear that
the scheme applies to the teachers of all Colleges
either Government or aided in Tamil Nadu unless
the individual college specifically exercises an
option to remain out of the scheme as provided
under the very same scheme. The scheme also
directs that all the teachers appointed after the
date from which the scheme has been given effect
to will be governed by the provisions of the
scheme.
Para 11:Under the scheme it is further provided
that the senior most person in the Department of
the College irrespective of his Ph.D qualification
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
will be examined and designated as Senior
Lecturer/ Selection Grade Lecturer/Reader and
Head of Department by the Director of Collegiate
Education that no special pay will be allowed to
that post.
Para 12:Therefore, it is clear that the Head of the
Department not being a promotion post, which
does not carry a special pay, the senior most
person in the department has to be nominated and
designated as the Head of the Department. The
first appellant college had admittedly subscribed
itself to the scheme and had accepted the revision
of pay scales in terms of the coverage prescribed
under the scheme. There is no dispute in this
respect that the entire college is receiving the
grant as per the revised pay scales introduced by
the said Government Order. Having accepted the
said coverage and having subjected itself to the
conditions stipulated in the scheme, it is too late
for the first respondent to contend that such a
condition will have no application at all not the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
9 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
appellant could avoid the compliance of the said
scheme." Para 14: "Therefore, in the light of the
said pronouncement having accepted the grant
subject to the conditions, and the post being only a
designated one which has to be done by the
Director of Collegiate Education, it follows that the
first appellant herein is bound to follow the rule of
seniority as has been ordered in this case. Hence,
we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by
the learned single Judge and we also hasten to add
that it is unnecessary to go into any other
contentions."
14.G.O.Ms.No.1785 was made pursuant to the
Committee appointed by the University Grants
commission, which is a body created in terms of
Entry 66 List 1 Schedule 7 of the Constitution of
India. University Grants Commission has to set
co-ordination standards for institutions of higher
learning. The University Grants Commission
appointed committees, made several
recommendations in respect of the college
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
10 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
teachers all over India and the said
recommendations were accepted by the
Government of India. The opinion of the State
Governments were also sought for and the State
Government appointed a high level committee to
go into the recommendations of the committee
appointed by the University Grants Commission. It
is pursuant to these recommendations, uniform pay
scale and service conditions were created for
affiliated college teachers all over India. It is only
after getting the opinion of all concerned, the
recommendations of the Committee were accepted
by University Grants Commission in terms of scale
of pay, nomenclature of teaching staff, Headship
and other conditions of service. It is pursuant to
the said exercise, G.O.Ms.No.1785 Education
Department dated 05.12.1988 came to be
issued,....."
8.Though the management claims that they have
gone to the Supreme Court against the said order
in SLP(Civil)No.22808 and 22809 of 2011, they
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
11 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
have not mentioned about any interim order being
obtained in the Supreme Court. In any event, this
Court as well as the division bench essentially had
dealt with the scope of minority right under Article
30(1) of the Constitution and that the senior most
person in the department being redesignated as
the HOD was not violative of Article 30(1). It is
rather unfortunate that the college should again
and again file such writ petitions and allow the
teachers to come to this court without adhering to
the precedent set up by this court. Therefore, this
court is not only constrained to mould the relief in
favour of the petitioner and give positive direction
to the management, but also to impose cost on the
management for their conduct in repeatedly
raising similar issue.
9.It must also be noted that an identical prayer had
been rejected in respect of an another minority
institution which is also an autonomous college in
The Principal and Secretary, Madras Christian
College, Madras and another V. Dr.(Mrs.) Shams
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
12 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
and another reported in 2001 (2) CTC 84 (cited
supra). There must be limit in such litigation.
Under these circumstances, instead of directing
the first and second respondents to give direction
to the third respondent college, since the third
respondent college also states that no direction
can be given by the Director of the Collegiate
Education as he only governed the Government
college, this court in exercise of power under
Article 226 is constrained to issue a mandamus
directing the third respondent to redesignate the
petitioner as the Head of the Department of Maths
forthwith in the place of the fourth respondent. “
7. The aforesaid Government Order as well as the
aforesaid decision clearly answer the contention as regards
non-possession of Ph.D. Degree by the petitioner.
8. The petitioner's counsel also draws my attention to
the proceedings dated 02.03.2018 issued by the Registrar of
Madurai Kamaraj University whereby the Post-Graduate
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
13 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
Department of Mathematics in The American College came to
be recognised as one of the research centre leading to Ph.D.
Degree in Mathematics. The petitioner was appointed as Head
of the said department on 01.06.2018. When the petitioner
was appointed as the Head of the Department, the department
was already recognised as research centre. The reason
ascribed in paragraph No.4 of the counter affidavit for
appointing the seventh respondent will therefore not hold
good.
9. Looked at from any angle, the impugned order
cannot be sustained and it is quashed. This writ petition
stands allowed. No costs. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petitions are closed.
02.12.2022
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes/ No
PMU
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
14 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
To:
1. The Director of Collegiate Education,
Institute of Advanced Studies in Education Campus,
No. 577, Anna Salai,
Saidapet,
Chennai-600 015.
2. The Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education,
Madurai Region,
Palam Station Road,
Madurai-625 002
3. The Registrar,
Madurai Kamaraj University,
Palkalai Nagar,
Madurai-625 021.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
15 W.P.(MD)NO.23903 OF 2022
G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.
PMU
W.P.(MD)No.23903 of 2022
02.12.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
