M GOPAL Vs. GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MR. SURESH Viswanath, learned Government Advocate takes notice for respondents 1 to 3.

(2.) PETITIONER seeks to challenge the proceedings of the 4th respondent dated 28. 10. 2004 and 29. 11. 2004 along with the consequential suspension order dated 01. 12. 2004. The earlier two other proceedings viz. , 28. 10. 2004 and 29. 11. 2004 are charge sheets issued to the petitioner while the last one is the suspension order pending disciplinary action. Admittedly, no relief has been claimed as against respondents 1 to 3 herein. As the challenge is solely as against the proceedings of the 4th respondent which is a private minority institution, I am of the view that the Writ Petition itself is not maintainable.

(3.) MR. S. VAIDYANATHAN, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner vehemently contended that the question of maintainbility has already been dealt with in the judgment reported in PON KAILASAM VS. THE SECRETARY, SARASWATHI NARAYANAN COLLEGE ( 1992 (2) MLJ 55) wherein a learned single Judge of this Court took the view that only the College Committee was competent to initiate disciplinary action, that the initiation of such proceedings by any other authority would strike at the very root of the matter and in such circumstances, the Writ Petition as against the private educational institution can be maintained. Relying upon the same, the learned counsel contended that at best, if the said judgment is not to be followed, this Court should refer the issue to a larger Bench as has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the judgment reported in GENERAL MANAGER,telecom VS A. SRINIVASA RAO, 1997 8 SCC 767 ).