Madras High Court
O.V.Mary Sheeja vs The State Of Tamil Nadu on 25 January, 2019
W.P.(MD)No.23779 of 2018
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
RESERVED ON : 05.04.2022
DELIVERED ON : 01.08.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P.(MD)No.23779 of 2018
and
W.M.P.(MD).Nos.21534 of 2018, 4120 and 19442 of 2019
O.V.Mary Sheeja ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State of Tamil Nadu,
Represented by it's Secretary,
Higher Education Department,
Fort St.George,
Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director of Collegiate Education,
College Road,
Chennai – 600 006.
3.The Joint Director of Collegiate Education,
Tirunelveli Region,
Tirunelveli – 627 001.
4.The Nesamony Memorial Christian College,
Represented by its Correspondent/Secretary,
Marthandam,
Kanyakumari District – 629 165.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/11
W.P.(MD)No.23779 of 2018
5.The Administrative Committee of the
Nesamony Memorial Christian College,
Represented by it's Chairman,
The Bishop of Kanyakumari Diocese CSI,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
6.The Administrative Secretary,
Nesamony Memorial Christian College,
Office of the Bishop of Kanyakumari Diocese CSI,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
7.The Treasurer
The Administrative Committee of the
Nesamony Memorial Christian College,
Office of the Bishop of Kanyakumari Diocese CSI,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
8.C.S.I.Kanyakumari Diocesan Employment Bureau,
Represented by its Convenor,
C.S.I.Kanyakumari Diocese,
Office of the Bishop of Kanyakumari Diocese CSI,
Nagercoil,
Kanyakumari District.
9.The Manomaniam Sundaranar University,
Represented by its Registrar,
Abishekapatti,
Tirunelveli – 627 012.
10.D.J.Jeejamol ... Respondents
(R-10 is suo motu impleaded vide Court Order dated 25.01.2019)
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2/11
W.P.(MD)No.23779 of 2018
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for
issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 4 to 8 to appoint the
petitioner as Assistant Professor in Physics, in the fourth respondent College,
against any one of the vacancies, caused by the retirement of the regular
incumbents, namely Mrs.P.T.Suchith Bala Zeenath and Mr.P.S.William Natha Raj
and send a proposal to the second and third respondents for their approval of the
appointment of the petitioner, in compliance with the order of this Court, dated
31.05.2018, passed in W.P.(MD).No.11808 of 2018.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.K.Chandra Sekhar
for Mr.B.Brijesh Kishore
For R-1 and R-3 : Mr.V.Omprakash,
Government Advocate (Civil Side).
For R-4 to R-8 : Mr.Isaac Mohanlal,
Senior Counsel,
for Mr.K.Ragatheesh Kumar
For R-9 : Mr.Mahaboob Athiff,
for M/s.Ajmal Associates.
For R-10 : Mr.K.N.Thampi
*****
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
3/11
W.P.(MD)No.23779 of 2018
ORDER
This Writ Petition has been filed for Mandamus directing the respondents 4 to 8 to appoint the petitioner as Assistant Professor Physics in the fourth respondent College against any one of the vacancies caused by the retirement of regular incumbent namely Mrs.P.T.Suchith Bala Zeenath and Mr.P.S.William Natha Raj and send a proposal to the official respondents for approval in compliance with the order of this Court dated 31.05.2018, passed in W.P. (MD).No.11808 of 2018.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner passed B.Sc., degree in April 2002, M.Sc., in April 2004, M.Phil. in Physics in February 2006 and obtained Ph.D., in Physics in July 2015. In addition to these degrees, the petitioner had obtained B.Ed., in August 2009. The contention of the petitioner is that she is eligible to be appointed as Assistant Professor in Physics in the fourth respondent College and the petitioner's qualification is approved by the nineth respondent University vide letter dated 17.03.2017. The appointment in the fourth respondent College is made only by the Governing Board. Since there is no Governing Board, the Administrative Committee has carried out the appointment. A procedure is followed in the office called Diocesan Employment Bureau where https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/11 W.P.(MD)No.23779 of 2018 a seniority list is followed. The petitioner registered her name and appointed as Assistant Professor in Department of Physics in Polytechnic College called Vethamanickam Memorial C.S.I Polytechnic College on 16.12.2015. In view of seniority and merit, the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor in Physics in the Faculty Development Programme in the fourth respondent College from 20.06.2016 to 03.08.2017 in the leave vacancy of the incumbent namely, S.C.Jeya Kumar. Thereafter, the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor in Physics under Self Financing Scheme on 16.08.2017 with effect from 04.08.2017. The contention of the petitioner is that the procedure for appointment is followed by certain Rules in the form of guidelines as early as 17.05.2011. As per the norms, it is evident that if eligible candidates are available in a particular College run by the Diocese, such candidate alone should be appointed. When no candidates available, then the candidates from the other College can be appointed. As per the official respondent proceedings dated 28.10.1999, the sanctioned strength in the Physics Department is 13. Two Associate Professors namely, P.T.Suchith Bala Zeenath and Mr.P.S.William Natha Raj retired from service on 31.05.2018 causing two regular vacancies. Since the petitioner is eligible, the petitioner submitted an application on 22.10.2018. The contention of the petitioner is that the fifth respondent ignoring the petitioner's seniority, merit and suitable qualification, took emergent steps to appoint two candidates working in another https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/11 W.P.(MD)No.23779 of 2018 constituent College on transfer in violation of norms. The petitioner filed W.P. (MD).No.11808 of 2018 and this Court vide order dated 31.05.2018 disposed the Writ Petition by directing the respondents to consider the petitioner's representation dated 18.04.2018 and 18.05.2018. Instead of obeying the said order, the respondents are attempting to appoint candidates from another constituent College, on transfer. Therefore, the petitioner has preferred this Writ Petition.
3. The contention of the petitioner is that the qualification prescribed by UGC is completion of Ph.D., then only the candidate is eligible for appointment. However, the Management Respondent has appointed one Sharmila Justice and Jeejamol. The petitioner relied on the date of appointment and the date of eligible qualification which is stated as under:
“NET/SLET shall remain the minimum eligibility condition for recruitment and appointment of Lecturers in Universities/Colleges/Institutions. Provided, however, that candidates, who are or have been awarded Ph.D. Degree in compliance of the “University Grants Commission (minimum standards and procedure for award of Ph.D. Degree), Regulation 2009, shall be exempted from the requirement of the minimum eligibility condition of NET/SLET for recruitment and appointment of Assistant Professor or equivalent positions in https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6/11 W.P.(MD)No.23779 of 2018 Universities/Colleges/Institutions”.
4. According to the petitioner, the Sharmila Justice has completed Ph.D. only on 21.02.2016 but the Management has appointed her on 02.01.2012. Likewise, Jeejamol has completed Ph.D. on 04.05.2018 but she was appointed on 12.07.2010, likewise, Sharmila Juliet has completed Ph.D. on 27.07.2018, but she was appointed on 09.07.2010 itself. However, the petitioner is qualified on 31.07.2015 and appointed on 17.12.2015. Likewise, one Ajitha Sweety completed her eligible qualification in the month of April 2014 and she was appointed on 05.08.2015. According to the petitioner even for Self Finance College, the candidate should complete the qualification necessary for the appointment, otherwise, the College is not following the rules and regulations. Therefore, the petitioner prayed to direct the respondents to appoint even in Self Finance College, only the eligible candidates. Since the Writ Petition of Asenath Benittais is dismissed, the appointment of the petitioner in W.P.(MD).No.23779 of 2018 is not affected.
5. The guidelines for appointment followed by the respondents are as under:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 7/11 W.P.(MD)No.23779 of 2018
l) In all the educational institutions (Schools and Colleges) managed by the Diocese, all appointments for teaching positions shall begin with Self Finance positions normally.
If properly qualified candidates are not available the highest in the rank list with the available qualification, will be appointed.
When the aided vacancies are sanctioned by the Government in Colleges, the senior eligible, qualified candidates; in the self finance stream (3 Arts and Science Colleges, Engineering and Polytechnic Colleges put together) will be forwarded by the DEB to the Governing Board of the College concerned for appointment. In the case of existing self finance staff in all the 3 Arts and Science Colleges, if they are qualified for the aided post, their seniority in the respective College will be maintained and they will be appointed when the vacancy arises. In case, there are no eligible candidates in that particular department, eligible candidates from the other Colleges will be appointed if available. If eligible candidates are not available in the other colleges also, eligible candidates from the DEB rank list shall be selected for appointment.
6. According to the petitioner, the College is following the seniority from the date of appointment, but the college ought to take the date of completion of qualification into account and fix seniority. The petitioner is seeking a direction to the College to follow the UGC regulations strictly atleast in future. Since the College is a private unaided minority college for some post and for some post the college is private aided minority college, the prayer of the petitioner cannot be https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 8/11 W.P.(MD)No.23779 of 2018 granted. The scheme of appointment followed by the respondent college is purely a contract between parties and it has not statutory value. However, the college is bound to follow the qualifications fixed by the UGC. Therefore, the positive direction cannot be granted to adhere to the scheme of appointment, but the college is directed to follow UGC Regulations strictly. The Learned Counsel for the College submitted that the petitioner can be accommodated only in the next available vacancy, therefore, the College is directed to consider the petitioner's candidature in the next available vacancy.
7. With the above direction, this Writ Petition is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
01.08.2022 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes Nsr Note:
In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the Advocate/litigant concerned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 9/11 W.P.(MD)No.23779 of 2018 To
1.The Secretary, The State of Tamil Nadu, Higher Education Department, Fort St.George, Chennai – 600 009.
2.The Director of Collegiate Education, College Road, Chennai – 600 006.
3.The Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Tirunelveli Region, Tirunelveli – 627 001.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 10/11 W.P.(MD)No.23779 of 2018 S.SRIMATHY, J Nsr Pre-delivery Order made in W.P.(MD)No.23779 of 2018 01.08.2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 11/11