Pandian. P Vs The Director of Collegiate Education… — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2024)

Pandian. P Vs The Director of Collegiate Education… — Education and Admissions | Madras HC (2024)

1 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED : 04.07.2024

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN

W.P.(MD)No.8801 of 2024 AND W.M.P.(MD)Nos.8021 & 8024 of 2024

P.Pandian, Secretary, Kallar Kalvi Kazhagam,(Regd.No.138/67), Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar College, Usilampatti – 625 532, Madurai District.

... Petitioner

Vs.

The Director of Collegiate Education Department, Directorate of Collegiate Education, EVK Sampath Building, 9^th Floor, College Road, Chennai – 600 006.

The Joint Director of Collegiate Education Department, Madurai Regional Directorate of Collegiate Education, Palam Station Road, Opp. to Ganapathy Silks, Sellur, Madurai – 625 002.

The Principal (In Charge), Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar College, Usilampatti, Madurai District – 625 532.

A.Jothirajan, Principal (In Charge), Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar College, Usilampatti – 625 532,

Madurai District.

Thamaraiselvan

(R-5 is impleaded vide order dated 29.04.2024

in W.M.P.(MD)No.9182 of 2024)

1/15

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

6. L.S.Balakrishnan

(R-6 is impleaded vide order dated 29.04.2024 in W.M.P.(MD)No.9186 of 2024)

7. R.Ayyar,

Kallar Kalvi Kazhagam, Usilampatti, Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar College, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District.

(R-7 is impleaded vide order dated 29.04.2024 in W.M.P.(MD)No.9327 of 2024)

... 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 relating to the proceedings of the 2^nd respondent in Na.Ka. No.10479/Aa/2023 dated 12.12.2023 and 20.03.2024 and quash the same as illegal and consequently direct the respondents not to interfere with the Management Affairs of the private self finance courses including the admissions that are being conducted by the Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar College.

For Petitioner	: Mr.M.Sricharan Rangarajan, Senior counsel, for Mr.C.Jeganathan.
For R-1 & R-2	: Mr.M.Sarangan, Additional Government Pleader.
For R-3 & R-4	: Mr.R.Ganesh Prabu
For R-5	: Mr.V.Surendran
For R-6	: Mr.S.Balaji
	* * *

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

2/15

3 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

O R D E R

Heard the learned Senior counsel appearing for the writ petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents and the learned counsel appearing for the private respondents.

The case on hand pertains to the affairs of the self financing section of Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar College, Usilampatti. Kallar Kalvi Kazhagam is its educational agency. The election to its executive committee was conducted in March 2020. Even though its tenure has expired, a new committee is yet to be elected. Thiru.Pandiyan was elected as Secretary by the executive committee in the election held in the year 2020. He challenges the impugned proceedings dated 12.12.2023 and 20.03.2024 issued by the Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Madurai authorising the Principal in-charge of the college to maintain the accounts pertaining to the self-financing section.

The learned Senior counsel reiterated all the contentions set out in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition and called upon this Court to set aside the impugned proceedings and grant relief as prayed for.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

3/15

4 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

The stand of the petitioner is contested both by the department as well as the Principal-in-charge and also the impleaded respondents. Their stand is that Pasumpon Muthuramalinga Thevar College is an aided college and that one cannot make a distinction between the aided section and the self financing stream. It is pointed out that the petitioner who was elected as Secretary in the year 2020 and Thiru.L.S.Balakrishnan who was elected as President are not on the same page. There is a clear dispute between the two. The petitioner would contend that Balakrishnan was removed from the post of President and he has filed civil suit challenging the same. The learned counsel appearing for the fifth respondent as well as the sixth respondent would claim that the resolution whereby Balakrishnan was removed is not genuine. Mr.Sarangan, learned Additional Government Pleader pointed out that since there is a dispute among the management, the department was justified in invoking G.O.Ms.No.1021 Education Department dated 02.09.1985. He pointed out that if the present arrangement itself is going to be implemented, this would cause confusion. The respondents called upon this Court to dismiss this writ petition.

I carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the materials on record.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

4/15

5 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

The impugned proceedings dated 12.12.2023 read as

follows:-

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

5/15

6 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

The impugned proceedings dated 20.03.2024 read as

follows:-

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

6/15

7 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

A careful reading of both the proceedings would indicate

that they refer to the earlier order dated 14.08.2023 passed by me in Cont.P.(MD)No.118 of 2023 in W.P.(MD)No.21365 of 2022. The said order reads thus:-

“ Contending that the order passed by this Court has been breached, the present contempt petition came to be filed.

2.The petitioner was suspended from service on 13.08.2021. As per statutory provisions, at the end of four months period, he is deemed to have been reinstated. He was reinstated in service on 13.12.2021. However, on

09.05.2022, he was relieved from service. Challenging the same, the petitioner filed W.P.(MD)No.21365 of 2022. I directed the college management to pay the salary arrears for the period from 10.05.2022 till the date of passing of the order. The purport of the order was that either the petitioner should be given employment or he must be paid

the salary. The petitioner has neither been given employment nor he has been paid salary. The stand of the

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

7/15

8 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

learned Additional Government Pleader is that the college is presently under direct payment. In my view, citing the said position, the order passed by this Court cannot be allowed to be frustrated. The petitioner has also not been paid the arrears from the said date. The petitioner has not been dealt with in the manner known to law.

3.Since there is no college committee and no Special Officer has been appointed, the Joint Director of Collegiate Education has authorised the Principal to operate the college account pertaining to the self finance section.

4.I, therefore, direct the Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Madurai Region to forthwith issue proceedings permitting the petitioner to rejoin the duty.

5.Call this case on 21.08.2023 for reporting compliance.”

Paragraph No.3 is a mere recording of submission made by learned counsel across the bar. I am not able to recount which counsel made such a submission. But then, it is a mere recording of the submission. This could not have formed the basis for passing the impugned proceedings.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

8/15

9 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

On the basis of paragraph No.3 of the order dated 14.08.2023 in Cont.P. (MD)No.118 of 2023, both the proceedings have been issued. This is evident from the expression used as “,jdbg;gilapy;”(on this basis). The department had already authorised the Principal to operate the college account pertaining to the self-financing section. I called upon the learned Additional Government Pleader to clarify if prior to 14.08.2023, any such authorisation letter was issued. It is now reiterated that vide letter bearing Na.Ka.No.1502/C 2/2021 dated 17.04.2023, permission was granted to the Principal in-charge to maintain separate accounts. Based on the said communication, the aforesaid submission was made and it was recorded by me. The submission was correct and the recording was also accurate. But then, recording of a fact based on the submission made across the bar could not have furnished the basis for issuing the impugned proceedings. The impugned proceedings will have to be independently justified. It is true that non-quoting of the relevant provision will not vitiate the proceedings. The learned Additional Government Pleader would state that the impugned proceedings can be justified with reference to G.O.Ms.No.1021 Education Department dated 02.09.1985. The said GO. Reads as follows:-

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

9/15

10 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

10/15

11 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

As rightly pointed out by the learned Senior counsel, this GO. will kick in only where there is a dispute over the Secretaryship of the aided

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

11/15

12 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

colleges. G.O.Ms.No.1021 dated 02.09.1985 is interventionist in nature. Any law or G.O. conferring such power to intervene in the management of private bodies must be strictly construed. The writ Court will not be justified in adding words. The G.O. defines the expression “management dispute” and it uses the word “secretaryship”. It is true that there is dispute regarding the removal of Thiru.Balakrishnan from the post of President. That is irrelevant. There must be dispute regarding Secretaryship. That alone is relevant. If there is no dispute as regards secretaryship, the GO. cannot kick in. The impugned proceedings nowhere refer to any such dispute over the Secretaryship of the college in question. It is true that the tenure of the committee has expired. The learned counsel appearing for Mr.Thamaraiselvan drew my attention to Section 15(4) of the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. This provision was already dealt with by me vide order dated 20.07.2022 in W.P.(MD)No.13642 of 2022 etc. batch(M.T.M.Thangaraj V. The District Registrar and others) . I had held that till the new committee is elected, the earlier committee will hold charge in adhoc capacity and by way of interim arrangement; but they cannot take any major decision having bearing on the institution.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

12/15

13 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

In this view of the matter, the impugned proceedings are set aside and the writ petition stands allowed. The outcome of this writ petition will not mean that the writ petitioner Thriu.P.Pandian has been empowered in his individual capacity. 16 persons were elected as members of the executive committee in the election held in March 2020. The new committee has not been elected. The old committee will have to function in an adhoc manner. The executive committee will have to maintain the accounts of the self-financing section of the petitioner college. This writ petition stands allowed. It is of course open to the jurisdictional civil Court to pass appropriate order in this regard. This order will be without prejudice to any direction that may be obtained before the jurisdictional civil Court. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

04.07.2024

NCC : Yes / No Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes/ No PMU

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

13/15

14 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

To:

The Director of Collegiate Education Department, Directorate of Collegiate Education, EVK Sampath Building, 9^th Floor, College Road, Chennai – 600 006.

The Joint Director of Collegiate Education Department, Madurai Regional Directorate of Collegiate Education, Palam Station Road, Opp. to Ganapathy Silks, Sellur, Madurai – 625 002.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

14/15

15 W.P.(MD)NO.8801 OF 2024

G.R.SWAMINATHAN,J.

PMU

W.P.(MD)No.8801 of 2024

04.07.2024

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

15/15