Judgment :- The petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent to grant sabbatical leave to the petitioner for one year immediately. 2. The petitioner has joined in the respon­dent-University as a Lecturer in August, 1980 in the Department of Management Studies and subsequently he was promoted as a Professor in the Department in the year 1999 and nomi­nated as Head of the Department of Entrepre­neurship Development. With a desire to docu­ment his experiences and observations in the field of Entrepreneurship Studies in the form of a book and complete the said job, the peti­tioner has applied to the respondent on 1.8.2005, requesting for grant of sabbatical leave for one year with effect from 3.8.2005. Since no order has been passed, he was con-strained to approach this Court. 3. The respondent filed counter affidavit. According to the respondent, while admitting the petitioner as Professor from 8.6.1990 (sic) and also submitted a letter dated 1.8.2005 that he has proposed to write a ‘Book on Entrepre­neurship' and requested to grant him sabbati­cal leave for one year, the respondent would state that the said letter has been sent without furnishing specific recommendations of the Head and Coordinator. The petitioner has also not mentioned the period of sabbatical leave. That apart, the case of the respondent is that the application has not been submitted along with the programme to be followed dur­ing the period of sabbatical leave which is a mandatory requirement as per the calendar of the University. The respondent would also state that the petitioner is involved in number of serious irregularities and diversion of Uni­versity funds in collusion with the former Vice-Chancellor and another faculty member. 4. According to the respondent, the irregu­larities relating to the Centre for Entrepreneur-ship Development and Department of Entre­preneurship Studies came to light in the finan­cial year 2003-2004. It is the case of the re­spondent that while working in the Department of Entrepreneurship Studies in the Madurai Kamaraj University, the petitioner connected it with a private organisation in which he held an honorary post. Even though, the same was originally permitted by the Syndicate, subsequently it was noted that there was diversion of funds of the University to the private Department. The respondent also would rely upon the Chapter 24 Statute 32 of the Madurai Kamaraj University Volume-I, which states that leave cannot be claimed as of right. Even though, the same was originally permitted by the Syndicate, subsequently it was noted that there was diversion of funds of the University to the private Department. The respondent also would rely upon the Chapter 24 Statute 32 of the Madurai Kamaraj University Volume-I, which states that leave cannot be claimed as of right. When exigencies of University service so require, discretion to refuse or revoke leave of any description is reserved to the Authority empowered to grant it. Therefore, according to the respondent, the petitioner cannot make de­mand for sabbatical leave as a matter of right. 5. Mr. S. Nagamuthu, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon Clause 18-A of the Madurai Kamaraj University Act, 1965, relating to guidelines for grant of sabbatical leave to Professors of a University which reads as follows: "The Syndicate shall grant sabbatical leave to Professors and study leave to permanent whole-time teachers (other than Professors of the University) as per the following norms laid down by the University Grants Commission: Guidelines for grant of sabbatical leave to Professors of a University: 1. Professors in a University not being eligi­ble for study leave shall be eligible for grant of sabbatical leave for a period of one year at the end of every six years of continuous ser­vice in the Professor's grade in the Univer­sity for undertaking study, research and writing purposes within the country or abroad. OR 1) Professors of a University, who have completed three years of service may be granted sabbatical leave to undertake study or research or other Academic pursuit solely for the object of increasing their pro­ficiency and usefulness to the University. This leave shall not be granted to a Profes­sor who has less than three years of service in the University before the age of superannuation. 2) The duration of sabbatical leave shall not exceed one or two semesters. Accordingly, if the Professor has actually worked in the University for not less than six or twelve se­mesters respectively since his return from the earlier spell of sabbatical leave; Pro­vided further that sabbatical leave shall not be granted until after the expiry of six se­mesters from the date of the Professor's return from previous sabbatical leave or any other kind of training programme. 2. 2. In reckoning the service in the Profes­sor's grade for this purpose, six years' ser­vice rendered without any break will be taken into account, i.e., it should not be in­tervened by any absence for a period ex­ceeding three months of the University ses­sion (excluding) vacation. For any absence for a period exceeding three months,' ser­vice for an additional period of equal dura­tion will have to be rendered for the comple­tion of six years' before each spell of sab­batical leave. 3. Sabbatical leave shall be granted for a pe­riod of twelve months' including vacations. Vacations will not be allowed to be prefixed or suffixed with sabbatical leave. 4. Sabbatical leave may be availed of, only twice, of one year each, only during the en-tire period of service of a Professor in the University, provided, he has rendered ap­proved service of not less than six years' be-fore each spell of sabbatical leave. 5. During the period of sabbatical leave, the Professor shall be allowed to draw the nor­mal increments on the due date and the period of leave shall also count as regular ser­vice for purpose of pension/retirement benefit provided that the Professor rejoins the University on the expiry of his leave. Note. 1. The programme to be followed during sabbatical leave shall be submitted for approval by the University along with the ap­plication for grant of leave. 2. On return from leave, the teacher shall report to the University, the nature of study, research or writing work undertaken during the period of leave. 6. A professor shall, during the period of sabbatical leave, be paid full pay and allow­ances (subject to the prescribed conditions being fulfilled) at the rates applicable to him immediately prior to his proceeding on sab­batical leave. The University shall not however fill up his post. 7. A professor on sabbatical leave shall not take up, during the period of that leave, any regular appointment under another organisation in India or abroad". 6. Therefore, according to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the Statute makes it very clear that sabbatical leave is in fact a matter of right and only condition is that the Pro­fessor should work for six years' and thereafter for one year he can avail the same. Even the pendency of any accusation proceedings against the petitioner is not a bar for availing the said leave. On the other hand, Mr. Even the pendency of any accusation proceedings against the petitioner is not a bar for availing the said leave. On the other hand, Mr. S. Chandrasekaran, the learned counsel for the University placed reliance on Clause 14 of the Chapter 13 which reads as follows: "Leave cannot be claimed as of right; and when the exigencies of the University so require, discretion to refuse or revoke leave of any description is reserved to the Authority empowered to grant it viz., the Syndicate". Further, the learned counsel also would rely upon a note under the "Guidelines for Grant of Sabbatical Leave to Professors of a University" which reads as under: "1. The programme to be followed during sabbatical leave shall be submitted for ap­proval (by the University) along with the application for grant of leave". 7. Therefore, according to the learned counsel, the application supposed to have been sent on 1.8.2005 was not in accordance with the Statute which gives the right to the Profes­sor to avail the leave. However, the learned counsel would submit that the petitioner has in fact made a subsequent application on 2.5.2006 along with the programmes and the same is pending with the University. 8. I have considered the aforesaid facts and also the rival submissions elucidated above and also the statutory position regarding the grant of sabbatical leave. I am of the considered view that the application, the one submit­ted along with the programme, is to be considered by the Syndicate for the grant of sabbati­cal leave to the petitioner. Inasmuch as the pe­titioner complies with the requirements of the Statute on 2.5.2006, there cannot be any im­pediment to the Syndicate of the University to consider the same in accordance with the Uni­versity guidelines. Needless to say that the University is bound by its own Statute and it cannot be heard to say that the University can act against the same. 9. In view of the same, the respondent-University is directed to consider the application dated 2.5.2006 which is in continuance of the earlier application dated 1.8.2005 and pass appropriate orders thereon if the petitioner otherwise satisfies the Laws of the University, and such orders shall be passed expeditiously in any event for being placed before the next Syndicate meeting for a decision in accordance with the directions given above. It is also made clear that the petitioner shall submit all necessary papers as required under the Statute. 10. With the above directions, the writ petition is disposed of. Writ petition disposed of.