Case Note & Summary
Background: The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Professor of Tamil in St. Judes College, Thoothur, a minority private institution affiliated to Manonmaniam Sundaranar University. He had been serving for 13 years. The Regional Joint Director of Collegiate Education granted approval for his appointment on 21.08.2018. However, the University granted qualification approval only from 18.06.2018, not from the initial appointment date of 24.01.2012. Aggrieved, the petitioner sought approval from the date of his initial appointment. Factual matrix: The petitioner submitted representations to the college Administration and the Joint Director. When no action was taken, he filed W.P.(MD)No.16487 of 2022. During its pendency, the Director of Collegiate Education, vide proceedings dated 25.08.2022, granted approval of his appointment with effect from 24.01.2012. Consequently, the petitioner withdrew that writ petition. However, the 25.08.2022 order was challenged in W.P.(MD)No.6625 of 2023, which remains pending. Meanwhile, the college Administrator submitted a proposal on 27.06.2024 (subsequently revised to 16.07.2024) to the University seeking qualification approval of the petitioner’s appointment from the initial date. The University did not take any decision on the proposal, compelling the petitioner to approach the Court again. Legal issues: The core issue was whether a writ of mandamus should issue directing the University to consider and pass orders on the pending proposal. Arguments: The petitioner contended that despite the approval of appointment by the Director of Collegiate Education, the qualification approval remained pending with the University, causing procedural hardship. The respondents did not oppose the limited prayer for direction to consider. Court’s analysis: Justice Battu Devanand observed that the limited prayer could be granted to meet the ends of justice without going into the merits of the dispute. The Court directed the University to consider the proposal dated 16.07.2024 in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders within four weeks. The Court did not express any opinion on the entitlement of the petitioner or the validity of any prior orders. Decision: The writ petition was disposed of with the above direction. No costs were awarded. The judgment thus compelled the University to act on the pending representation, providing procedural relief to the petitioner.
Headnote
A) Writ Jurisdiction - Mandamus - Direction to consider representation - Constitution of India, Article 226 - The petitioner, an Assistant Professor, sought qualification approval from the date of initial appointment; the University had not acted on the proposal; considering the facts, the Court directed the University to consider the proposal dated 16.07.2024 and pass orders within four weeks without entering into merits - Held, the writ petition stands disposed of with said direction (Paras 5-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a writ of mandamus should be issued directing the first respondent University to consider and pass orders on the second respondent's proposal for qualification approval of the petitioner's appointment with effect from 24.01.2012.
Final Decision
The writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the first respondent University to consider the proposal sent by the second respondent dated 16.07.2024, in accordance with law, and pass orders within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. No costs.
Law Points
- Legal points not extracted
- Article 226
- writ of mandamus
- consideration of proposal
- qualification approval
- university
- college
