Madras High Court
R.Natarajan vs The President/Administrator ... on 5 July, 2023
W.P.No.23875 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 05.07.2023
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SATHISH KUMAR
W.P.No.23875 of 2022
and WMP Nos.22877, 22880 of 2022 and 7164 of 2023
R.Natarajan ...Petitioner
Vs
1.The President/Administrator General
and Official Trustee (AG & OT),
Pachaiyappa's Trust Board,
Chennai-600 030.
2. The Secretary,
Pachiyappa's Trust Board,
Chennai-600 030.
3. The Joint Director of Collegiate Education,
Saidapet, Chennai-600 015. ...Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to
issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus to call for the records from the 3 rd
respondent dated 18.08.2022 in Proceeding O.Mu.No.4982/U1/2022 and quash
the same and consequently direct the 3rd respondent to give re-employment to
the petitioner from 01.07.2022 to 30.04.2023.
1/10
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23875 of 2022
For Petitioner : Ms.S.Thamizharasi
For Respondents : Mr.E.V.Chandru
Standing Counsel for R.1 and R.2
: Mr.V.Jeevagiridharan, AGP
For R.3
ORDER
The writ petition has been filed to quash the proceedings of the third
respondent in O.Mu.No.4982/U1/2022 dated 18.08.2022 and direct the third
respondent to give re-employment to the petitioner.
2. The writ petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor of Economics
by the Pachaiyappa's Trust Board on 09.12.1995 in Pachaiyappa's College and
he has put in more than 27 years of service and retired as an Associate
Professor and Head of the Department of Economics in Pachaiyappa's College,
Chennai on 30.06.2022 on attaining the age of superannuation at 60 years.
3. As per the Proceedings of the Director of the Collegiate Education in
Na.Ka.No.20634/J2/2022 dated 30.06.2022, the writ petitioner is eligible for
re-employment from 01.07.2022 to 30.04.2023 till the academic year is over.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23875 of 2022
The petitioner gave representations twice to the second respondent with a
request to send the re-employment proposal to the Joint Director of the
Collegiate Education. However, the second respondent refused to forward the
proposal of re-employment and on the contrary, served the Memorandum in
R.C.No.B2/798/2020 dated 10.06.2020 alleging that as Additional Warden, the
petitioner failed to bring to the notice of the Management about the
issues/irregularities in the Panchaiyappa's College Hostel, for which the
petitioner had given detailed explanation on 23.06.2020 and 09.09.2021 to the
second respondent. However, without conducting any enquiry, the second
respondent filed a petition under Section 156 of Criminal Procedure Code. As
there is no criminal case or charge pending against the petitioner, certainly, the
petitioner is entitled for re-employment as per the Proceedings of the
Directorate of Collegiate Education dated 30.06.2022.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner's re-
employment was purposely denied and there is no charge pending against the
petitioner and he is entitled for re-employment from 01.07.2022 to 30.04.2023
till the academic year is over. In support of his submission, he has placed
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23875 of 2022
reliance on the judgment of this court in the case of G.Menaka vs The Chief
Educational Officer (W.P.No.14014 of 2009 dated 20.07.2011).
5. Counter-affidavit has been filed to the effect that the writ petitioner is
not eligible in view of his professional misconduct apart from swindling of
students' money to the tune of several lakhs which got surfaced as a result of
forensic audit report dated 19.05.2020. The petitioner and four others had
indulged in misappropriation of Pachaiyappa's Hostel Mess Funds to a sum of
Rs.35,24,972/- and Electricity Funds to a sum of Rs.8,34,320/-. In this regard,
the Trust has also lodged complaint against the petitioner and four others and
the same is still pending. It is the contention that the petitioner cannot claim as
a matter of right for re-employment and the writ petition has become
infructuous, as re-employment period is over.
6. Heard the submissions on either side and perused the materials
available on record.
7. No doubt, the Government issued general order vide Proceedings
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23875 of 2022
dated 07.10.2022 in RC No.28377/J1/2018, allowing re-employment of
Principals/Teachers including Librarian and Physical Directors/Joint Directors
working in Government/Government Aided Colleges may be allowed till the
end of the academic year i..e, April 30, for those who are retiring on attaining
the age of superannuation in the middle of the academic year.
8. The above Proceedings have been issued in pursuant to
G.O.Ms.No.188, Higher Education (F1) Department, dated 23.09.2022,
wherein certain conditions have been stipulated, which read thus:
(i) During the period of re-employement, they shall
draw such pay as together with their pension
equivalent to Death-Cum-Retirement Gratuity and
the amount shall not exceed the pay last drawn by
them at the time of their retirement, vide Rule 44 of
Tamil Nadu Pension Rules 1978.
(ii) Any amount of over payment pertaining to the
pre-retirement period shall be recovered, by
adjustment of the pay and allowances, admissible to
them, during the period of re-employment.
(iii) Their behaviour and conduct of work should
continue to be satisfactory.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23875 of 2022
(iv) Disciplinary/Criminal/Directorate of Vigilance
and Anti-Corruption cases shall not have been
contemplated or pending against the re-employed
officer.
v) Their health condition should be normal.
vi)Their service shall be liable for termination at
one month's notice, on either side, within the
specified terms. Provided that it shall not be
necessary for the authority which sanctioned the re-
employment to give the notice of one month referred
to above, to the re-employed officer, if the services
are terminated on the ground of moral turpitude.
9. On perusal of the order makes it clear that only on satisfying the
conditions laid down in the Government Order, re-employment can be sought
for. Once the person does not satisfy the conditions stipulated in the
Government Order and any criminal case or proceeding is initiated, which
resulted in any action being contemplated, either disciplinary proceedings or
criminal case, re-employment is not automatic.
10. On perusal of the records, it is clear that the very allegation made
against the petitioner is misappropriation. Such allegation is found only by
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23875 of 2022
forensic audit by the Administrator who is none other than the retired Judge of
this Court viz., Justice P.Shanmugam. Only on the basis of forensic audit
conducted, certain irregularities were found against the petitioner and others
and it also appears from the records that based on such irregularities, the
respondents have also taken action to prosecute the persons who are alleged to
have involved in such irregularities. However, investigation has not been
proceeded properly and it is now represented by the respondents that protest
petition has been filed by the petitioner challenging the probe of investigation.
11. In such view of the matter, persons against whom allegations have
been made and action has been contemplated, merely on the basis of the
Government Order which provides for re-employment, the persons, as a matter
of right, cannot seek re-employment. The very object of re-employment is only
to benefit the students. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that
as a matter of right, re-employment cannot be claimed merely on the basis of
Government Order. What is relevant is that the allegation is of
misappropriation of hostel funds and the said irregularities came to light
through the Forensic Audit Report dated 19.05.2020. Such being the position,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23875 of 2022
the judgment cited by the writ petitioner to claim atleast salary for the period
cannot be pressed into service and the same is not applicable to the facts of this
case.
12. Therefore, I do not find any merit in the writ petition and the writ
petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous
petitions are closed.
13. At this stage, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
petitioner retired on 30.06.2022 and his pension papers have not been
forwarded by the respondents. In such view of the matter, the respondents are
directed to forward the pension papers of the petitioner to the concerned
authorities, as per the Pension Rules.
05.07.2023
Index:Yes/No
Speaking order/Non-speaking order
sr
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23875 of 2022
To
1.The President/Administrator General and Official Trustee (AG & OT),
Pachaiyappa's Trust Board,
Chennai-600 030.
2. The Secretary,
Pachiyappa's Trust Board,
Chennai-600 030.
3. The Joint Director of Collegiate Education,
Saidapet, Chennai-600 015.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.No.23875 of 2022
N.SATHISH KUMAR,J.,
sr
W.P.No.23875 of 2022
05.07.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
