0% found this document useful (0 votes)
152 views9 pages

Display PDF

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court ruled in favor of St. Ignatius College of Education, directing the approval of Mr. J. Antony James's appointment as Watchman and the disbursement of his salary from June 1, 2022. The court found that previous government orders mandating outsourcing of certain staff positions were invalid and not applicable to private educational institutions. The court ordered the relevant authorities to comply with its decision within four weeks.
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
152 views9 pages

Display PDF

The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court ruled in favor of St. Ignatius College of Education, directing the approval of Mr. J. Antony James's appointment as Watchman and the disbursement of his salary from June 1, 2022. The court found that previous government orders mandating outsourcing of certain staff positions were invalid and not applicable to private educational institutions. The court ordered the relevant authorities to comply with its decision within four weeks.
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

WP(MD) No.

23255 of 2023

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED: 21.06.2024

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE R.N.MANJULA

W.P.(MD)No.23255 of 2023
and WMP(MD)No.19451 & 24713 of 2023

The Secretary,
ST.Ignatius College of Education (Autonomous),
Palayamkottai,
Tirunelveli – 627 002. .. Petitioner

Vs.

1. The State of Tamil Nadu,


Represented by its Secretary,
Department of Higher Education,
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 - 627 008. ...Respondents

Prayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus,

calling for the records relating to the impugned proceedings issued by

1/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP(MD) No.23255 of 2023

the 2nd respondent Director in Na.Ka.No.12308/H1/2023-2 dated

20.04.2023 and the consequential proceedings of 3rd respondent Joint

Director in O.Mu.No.7136/U4/2023 dated 20.09.2023 and quash the

same and further direct the 3rd respondent Joint Director to approve

forthwith the appointment of Mr.J.Antony James as Watchman in the

petitioner college and disburse the grant-in-aid towards his salary and

allowances with effect from the date of appointment i.e., 01.06.2022.

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Ruban Babu


for M/s. Isaac Chambers

For Respondents : Mr. M.Siddharthan


Additional Government Pleader

ORDER

Heard Mr.A.Ruban Babu, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and Mr.M.Siddharthan, learned Additional Government

Pleader appearing for the respondents.

2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking Writ of

Certiorarified Mandamus to quash the impugned proceedings issued by

the 2nd respondent in Na.Ka.No.12308/H1/2023-2 dated 20.04.2023 and

2/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP(MD) No.23255 of 2023

the consequential proceedings of 3rd respondent in O.Mu.No.

7136/U4/2023 dated 20.09.2023 and further direct the 3rd respondent

to approve forthwith the appointment of Mr.J.Antony James as

Watchman in the petitioner college and disburse the grant-in-aid towards

his salary and allowances with effect from the date of appointment i.e.,

01.06.2022.

3. The petitioner College has appointed one J.Antony James as

Watchman on 01.06.2022. When the proposal was sent for approval of

the third respondent, it was rejected stating that all grouped categories

like Sweepers, Scavengers, Cleaner and Gardener shall be progressively

outsourced and entrusted on contract basis in view of the G.O.Ms.No.49

Employees and Administrative Reforms (F) Department dated

14.05.2002.

4. The above Government Order has issued to the Government

Departments subsequently extended to the appointments made by the

aided Colleges as a whole by issuing another G.O.Ms.No.219 dated

24.10.2013. However, the said Government Order was subsequently

3/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP(MD) No.23255 of 2023

challenged by way of filing W.P.(MD)No.15669 of 2016 by the very

same college and the said writ petition was allowed by declaring the

G.O.Ms.No.219 dated 24.10.2023 as invalid. The appeal filed by the

Government challenging the writ petition filed by similar aided college

in W.A(MD).No.2096 and 2124 of 2019 has also been dismissed on

19.07.2019.

5. In the subsequent writ petitions, the above judgment has been

followed by making due reference. In this regard, I feel it is appropriate

to cite the judgment of this Court held in W.P.(MD)No.15669 of 2016

dated 12.08.2021 wherein it is held as under:

“ 4.A Division Bench of this Court in Writ Appeal in W.A.No.


2096 and 2124 of 2019, by order, dated 19.07.2019, considered the
validity of G.O.(Ms) No.219, Higher Education (D1) Department,
dated 24.10.2013. Originally, writ petitions challenging the G.O.
(Ms) No.219, dated 24.10.2013, were allowed, after holding that the
posts, which were sanctioned in accordance with the Tamil Nadu
Private Schools Regulations Act, 1976 and the Rules made
thereunder, cannot be taken away by issuing Government Order
directing or permitting outsource. The order of learned Single Judge
allowing the writ petitions was upheld by the Hon'ble Division Bench
in the order passed in W.A.Nos.2096 & 2124 of 2019, dated
19.07.2019. The relevant portion of the order is extracted below:-

4/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP(MD) No.23255 of 2023

“5. The Government issued an order in G.O.(Ms) No.


219, Higher Education, dated 24.10.2013 directing the
Management for outsourcing the vacancies in Group D
categories like Sweeper, Scavenger, Cleaner and Gardener.
The proposals submitted by the Management was rejected
only on the basis of the order in G.O.(Ms) No.219 dated
24.10.2013.
6. Rule 11 (1) of the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges
(Regulation) Rules, 1976, contain a legislative mandate to fix
the staff strength every year. Rule 11 (3) provides that in case
of regular vacancy, it is open to the Management to fill up the
post on regular basis, the only requirement being that the
candidate should be qualified.
7. There is no dispute that the Management was entitled to
make appointments taking into account four vacancies in the
post of Non-teaching staff. The denial of approval was only
on account of the order in G.O.(Ms) No.219 dated 24.10.2013
There is no question of issuing a Government Order for
outsourcing, even in respect of the sanctioned post. When it is
made out that the post is sanctioned, the Management is
having every right to fill up the post. The Government has no
right to say that the post should be filled up only by
outsourcing.
8. The posts were sanctioned only in accordance with the
Tamil Nadu Private Schools Regulation Act, 1976 and the
Rules made thereunder. The staff strength fixed as per the
Rules cannot be taken away by issuing a Government Order
directing or permitting outsourcing. We are therefore of the
view that the learned Single Judge was justified in allowing
the Writ Petition.”
5.The above Judgment of the Division Bench is also followed
by a subsequent decision, by another Division Bench in W.A.
(MD).No.532 to 534 of 2020, dated 06.08.2020, in the case of State
of Tamil Nadu through its Principal Secretary to Government and
another Vs. Women's Christian College, Nagercoil and others.
6.In the counter affidavit filed by the second respondent, the
second respondent has no other defence except referring to G.O.(Ms)
No.219, dated 24.10.2013.

5/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP(MD) No.23255 of 2023

7.Since, this Court has declared that G.O.(Ms) No.219, dated


24.10.2013, is invalid and opposed to the Statutory Provisions, the
impugned order cannot be sustained. As submitted by the learned
Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, the Government Order
cannot be made applicable to the post, which fell vacant after
31.05.2011. Reading of the impugned Government Order, it is seen
that the Government Order is intended to cover vacancies that have
fallen vacant during the period from 01.06.2008 to 31.05.2011.
Hence, on both grounds the writ petition deserves to be allowed.
8.The learned Government Advocate appearing for the
respondent submitted that the G.O.(Ms) No.49, Personnel and
Administrative Reforms Department, dated 14.05.2002, is also
relevant, as the Government has taken decision as early in 2002 and
directed the outsourcing of 'D' category staffs like sweeper,
scavenger, cleaner, gardener and Office Assistant etc. The learned
counsel fails to note that the G.O.(Ms) No.49, dated 14.05.2002, was
the recommendations for Government Departments. It is stated
therein that all Group 'D' categories like Sweepers and Scavengers,
etc. should be progressively outsourced and engaged on contract
basis. Therefore, the Public Departments and the District Collectors
were directed to outsource the services on contract basis. This
Government Order has no application to Private Educational
Institutions. Only by G.O.(Ms) No.219, dated 24.10.2013, there was
a direction to fill up vacancies during the period from 01.06.2008 to
31.05.2011 through outsourcing and on contract basis, based on the
earlier Government Order vide G.O.(Ms) No.49, dated 14.05.2002,
which was in respect of Government Departments.”

6/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP(MD) No.23255 of 2023

6. So in the above judgment itself it is clarified that G.O.Ms.No.

49 dated 14.05.2002 is not applicable to the private Educational

Institutions like the petitioner's College and the only Government Order

applicable is G.O.Ms.No.219 Higher Education Department dated

24.10.2013. Even the said Government Order has been subsequently

quashed and hence the impugned orders are liable to be set aside.

7. In view of the above stated reasons, the impugned orders are set

aside. The 3rd respondent is directed to grant approval of the

appointment of J.Antony James as Watchman in the petitioner college, if

it is otherwise in order and pass orders in the light of the earlier judicial

pronouncements made in this regard within a period of four weeks from

the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

8. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. No

Costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

21.06.2024
(2/2)
Index : Yes / No
NCC : Yes / No
PJL

7/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP(MD) No.23255 of 2023

To
1. The Secretary,
State of Tamil Nadu,
Department of Higher Education,
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 - 627 008.

8/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
WP(MD) No.23255 of 2023

R.N.MANJULA, J.

PJL

W.P.(MD)No.23255 of 2023
and WMP(MD)No.19451 &
24713 of 2023

21.06.2024

9/9
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

You might also like