MAYA MANIKANDAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner claiming to be a practicing Advocate at Virudhachalam, has filed the present writ petition seeking for the issuance of writ of quo warranto asking the 7th respondent to show cause as to what authority he is holding the post of the Principal, Dr.Ambedkar Law College, Chennai.

(2.) WHEN the matter came up on 01.02.2013, this court directed the learned Special Government Pleader to get instructions from respondents 1 and 2 and in respect of others, private notice was directed to be served. Accordingly, notices have been served. On behalf of the first respondent State, a counter affidavit, dated Nil (February, 2013) has been filed. The said affidavit was also filed on behalf of the second respondent. The 7th respondent has also independently filed a counter affidavit, dated 22.02.2013.

(3.) THE substance of the allegation made by the petitioner was that the 7th respondent was appointed as a Lecturer in Law (Senior Grade) on contract basis in the Government Law College during the year 1988-1990. His service was regularised by G.O.Ms.No.9, Law Department, dated 18.01.2001 with effect from 26.03.1993. He was promoted as an Associate Professor (Law) by G.O.Ms.No.90, dated 14.05.2008 with effect from 25.3.1998. By G.O.Ms.No.241, Law Department, dated 17.6.2011, the 7th respondent was promoted as Principal of the Government Law College at Madurai. At present, he is working as the Principal of Dr.Ambedkar Government Law College, Chennai. The 7th respondent had not fulfilled the eligibility criteria prescribed by the University Grants Commission to hold the post of the Principal of the Law College. He has no requisite teaching experience and has no qualified marks in P.G. level. He was also not possessing Ph.D at the time of his promotion as the Principal of the Law college. Suspecting his lack of qualification, the petitioner made an enquiry by resorting to the provisions under the Right to Information Act. The petitioner was informed that the 7th respondent did not possess Ph.D on the date of his promotion, i.e., 17.06.2011. He had only secured 52.88 % of marks in the M.L. Degree and had worked only for 12 years as Associate Professor as against the minimum experience of 15 years prescribed by the UGC. Therefore, he was usurped to the post and was not eligible to hold the post of the Principal.