Research › Search › Judgment

Madras High Court · body

2014 DIGILAW 1283 (MAD)

E. Giftin Vedha Merly v. State of Tamil Nadu

2014-06-12

D.HARIPARANTHAMAN

body2014
Judgment : 1. Heard both sides. By consent, the writ petition is taken up for final disposal. 2. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor in Mathematics in the fourth respondent college. Her appointment was against a regular vacancy that was caused due to the death of then incumbent. According to the petitioner, since she was appointed against regular vacancy, her appointment should be approved by the second respondent for sanction of grant and necessary proposal should be sent by the third respondent to the second respondent in this regard. But her grievance is that so far no such proposal is sent by the third respondent to the second respondent. 3. At the time of argument, it is admitted by the learned counsel on either side that (i) if the petitioner is appointed against a permanent vacancy that was caused due to the death of then incumbent and (ii) if the qualification of the petitioner is approved under Section 15 of the Tamil Nadu Private College (Regulations) Act, 1976, by the concerned university, to which the fourth respondent College is affiliated, the second respondent shall sanction the grant for appointment of the petitioner, in the case of minority institutions. 4. In these circumstances, the learned counsel for the petitioner has brought to my notice a similar order passed by this Court in W.P.No.20899 of 2013 dated 31.07.2013, wherein the third respondent sent proposal to the second respondent, for approval, as the petitioner therein was appointed against a regular vacancy that was caused due to the death of regular incumbent and also her qualification was approved by Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, as ascertained by the third respondent. 5. In these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to make a representation to the third respondent seeking sanction of grant and on receipt of such representation, the third respondent is directed to send proposal to the second respondent, after ascertaining as to whether (i) the petitioner was appointed against regular vacancy that was caused due to the death of regular incumbent and (ii) whether the qualification of the petitioner was approved by the concerned university under Section 15 of the Tamil Nadu Private College (Regulations) Act, 1976, within a period of six weeks thereafter. Consequently, the second respondent is directed to pass orders on the proposal, regarding sanction of grant, within a period of two weeks thereafter. 6. Consequently, the second respondent is directed to pass orders on the proposal, regarding sanction of grant, within a period of two weeks thereafter. 6. The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.