ORDER : The present writ petition has been filed by an Associate Professor/Head of Malayalam Department of the third respondent college challenging an order of redeployment issued by the first respondent on 16.08.2024 and the consequential relieving order issued by the third respondent on 21.08.2024. (A) Factual Matrix: 2. A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the third respondent College has sent a communication to the second respondent intimating the fact that only one student got admitted in the Malayalam Department in each one of the academic year 2019-2020 and 2020-2021. There was no admission from the academic year 2021 onwards. This communication was verified by the first respondent and in his communication dated 20.11.2023, he had stated that for releasing grant-in-aid, a minimum of 10 students is required. Since no students got admitted in the Malayalam department for the past three years, he had recommended for redeployment of the writ petitioner to a different college. Pursuant to the said recommendation, the first respondent has passed the impugned redeployment order on 16.08.2024 deploying the petitioner to the Malayalam department in Sri Devi Kumari Womens College at Kuzhithurai. 3. A perusal of the impugned order further reveals that the petitioner's name is retained in the third respondent college for the purpose of disbursement of salary and the petitioner would be permitted to get re-transferred to the parent college as and when the students strength gets increased. A consequential order was passed by the third respondent on 21.08.2024 relieving the writ petitioner to enable him to join the deployed college. These two orders are under challenge in the present writ petition. (B) Contentions of the counsels appearing on either side: 4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner herein had made the following submissions challenging the order of deployment. (a) The writ petitioner is not only an Associate Professor and the Head of Malayalam Department, he is also an Associate Officer in the third respondent College. Several NCC students are undergoing training under him. The petitioner has been re-deployed to a college where there is no NCC unit. (b) NCC is one of the optional theory paper to the students studying in various departments of the College. The petitioner is taking theory classes for more than 120 students. This aspect has not been taken into consideration at the time of passing the deployment order. The petitioner has been re-deployed to a college where there is no NCC unit. (b) NCC is one of the optional theory paper to the students studying in various departments of the College. The petitioner is taking theory classes for more than 120 students. This aspect has not been taken into consideration at the time of passing the deployment order. (c) As per Section 24(4) of NCC Act 1948, the prior permission of Tamil Nadu State NCC Directorate has to be obtained. (d) The Government of Tamil Nadu has issued G.O.Ms.No.61 Higher Education (D1) Department dated 03.03.1999 wherein orders have been issued to the effect that the Deputy Director of General NCC should be consulted prior to issuance to transfer order to Associate NCC Officers under the administrative control of Director of School Education/ Director of Collegiate Education. In the present case, no such prior consultation has taken place. (e) The petitioner has now been redeployed to Sri Devi Kumari Womens College at Kuzhithurai where there is no NCC Unit at all. The entire money spent from the Government exchequer for training the writ petitioner as well as for conducting various camps would become futile exercise. (f) The Administrative Officer of NCC has addressed a communication to the Director of Collegiate Education on 27.09.2024 seeking to cancel the order of deployment. The said aspect should be taken into consideration and the order of deployment shall be set aside. (g) The petitioner herein is the senior most Associate Professor of the third respondent College and he should have been included as one of the members of the College Committee as per Rule 8(3) of Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Rules, 1976. However, the said request was not considered by the management and hence, the petitioner was constrained to filed WP(MD).No.20237 of 2023 seeking mandamus directing the College to accommodate the petitioner as a member of the College Committee. The writ petition was allowed by this Court on 10.11.2023. Though the college had filed a writ appeal and obtained an order of interim stay for a limited period, even after the expiry of the interim orders, the management has not chosen to accommodate the petitioner in the College Committee. The petitioner being a senior most professor is likely to be promoted and appointed as a principal of the College. Though the college had filed a writ appeal and obtained an order of interim stay for a limited period, even after the expiry of the interim orders, the management has not chosen to accommodate the petitioner in the College Committee. The petitioner being a senior most professor is likely to be promoted and appointed as a principal of the College. In such circumstances, the impugned order of the redeployment has been issued only with a malafide intention to prevent the writ petitioner from becoming member of the College Committee or the principal of the said College. (h) The learned Senior Counsel had further contended that the order of deployment was issued to the writ petitioner on 16.08.2024. However, the management of the deputed college had filled up the said post by way of appointing another candidate, who had joined duty on 23.09.2024. Therefore, there is no vacancy in Sri Devi Kumari Womens College at Kuzhithurai and the order of deployment has become unenforceable and therefore, it is liable to be set aside. 5. Per contra, the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the official respondents had contended that there are no students in the Malayalam Department of the third respondent for the past three academic years. The writ petitioner is drawing a salary of Rs.3,20,000/-. The Government cannot disburse grant to a teacher without extracting any work. This may lead to audit objection being raised by the Accountant General Office. 6. The learned Additional Advocate General had further contended thatG.O.Ms.No.61, Higher Education (D1) Department dated 03.03.1999 is applicable only for the Government institutions and not for private aided institutions. He further contended that though it is alleged that another candidate has been appointed to the deployed post of the writ petitioner, the department has not received any request for approval of the said appointment. 7. Until the appointment of another candidate is approved, there is a vacancy in Sri Devi Kumari Womens College at Kuzhithurai and therefore, there cannot be any impediment for the writ petitioner to join duty. He had further contended that Dr.M.Thanumalaya Perumal has been appointed as a care-taker of NCC Unit of that college and therefore, NCC activities would not suffer due to deployment of the writ petitioner. 8. He had further contended that Dr.M.Thanumalaya Perumal has been appointed as a care-taker of NCC Unit of that college and therefore, NCC activities would not suffer due to deployment of the writ petitioner. 8. The learned counsel appearing for the college management had contended that the order of deployment has been issued by the educational authority only due to fall in student's strength. The order having been passed by the Directorate, malafides cannot be alleged as against the management. Another Professor namely Mrs.Chamundi who is also a commandant is taking care of NCC girls cadres. No theory class are being conducted in the subject of NCC for any other students in the college. 9. The learned counsel appearing for the college management has further contended that Section 24 of the NCC Act, 1948 has been interpreted by this Court in WP(MD).No.7890 of 2009 (C. Sengottuvel Vs. The Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Technical Education, Chennai and others) dated 26.02.2010 as merely directory in nature and therefore, merely because there was no prior consultation, that would not vitiate the order of deployment. He had further relied upon the judgment of the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur in W.P.No.1272 of 2018 (P.D. Sonekar Vs. State of Chhattisgarh and others) and contended that the transfer and posting of NCC Officer are within the exclusive domain of State authorities and it is the prerogative of Government in deciding the place of posting. He had further contended that G.O.Ms.No.61 dated 03.03.1999 is applicable only in issuance of transfer orders to the Associate NCC Officers under the administrative control of Directorate of Collegiate Education. 10. Admittedly, the petitioner institution is an aided institution which does not come under the administrative control of Directorate of Collegiate Education. Therefore, the said defence is not applicable. That apart, the petitioner is working in the third respondent college from the year 1991 onwards and therefore, the order of deployment issued in the year 2024 cannot cause any prejudice to the writ petitioner. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. 11. I have considered the submissions made on either side and perused the material records. (C) Discussion: 12. The order of deployment passed by the first respondent is challenged primarily on the ground of malafide and on the ground of non-consultation with the Deputy Director General of NCC before effecting deployment. 13. 11. I have considered the submissions made on either side and perused the material records. (C) Discussion: 12. The order of deployment passed by the first respondent is challenged primarily on the ground of malafide and on the ground of non-consultation with the Deputy Director General of NCC before effecting deployment. 13. A perusal of the impugned order dated 16.08.2024 reveals that it is not a transfer order, but only a redeployment order. For the past three academic years, not even a single student had got admitted to the Malayalam Department. In such circumstances, the Educational Department was constrained to redeploy the petitioner to another college in the same District where there are more than 10 Malayalam students. Though there may be some dispute between the management and the writ petitioner, the deployment order has been issued solely on the ground that for the past three academic years, not even a single student was admitted to Malayalam department. Therefore, the dispute between the management and the writ petitioner cannot be pressed into service to allege malafides to invalidate the order of deployment passed by the Directorate of Collegiate Education. 14. A perusal of Rule 22 of NCC Rules reveal that a person commissioned in the National Cadet Corps shall hold that commission as Officer in that corps only up to the age of 50 years. Admittedly, the petitioner is 57 years old when the order of deployment was issued. Therefore, it is clear that the petitioner is already over-aged to hold the post of Associate Officer in NCC. As rightly pointed out by the learned Additional Advocate General, G.O.Ms.No.61 Higher Education (D1) Department dated 03.03.1999 is applicable only to Government educational institution which are under the administrative control of Directorate of Collegiate Education. The third respondent management is an aided college for which the above said Government Order is not applicable. 15. Our High Court in WP(MD).No.7890 of 2009 (C.Sengottuvel Vs. The Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Technical Education Chennai and others) dated 26.02.2010 has held that there is no absolute bar under the Government Order for transferring the NCC Officer, but it is only recommendatory in nature. This Court had further held that the non-consultation will not vitiate the order of transfer. 15. Our High Court in WP(MD).No.7890 of 2009 (C.Sengottuvel Vs. The Principal Secretary/Commissioner of Technical Education Chennai and others) dated 26.02.2010 has held that there is no absolute bar under the Government Order for transferring the NCC Officer, but it is only recommendatory in nature. This Court had further held that the non-consultation will not vitiate the order of transfer. In the present case, it is not even an order of transfer, but only an order of redeployment retaining the name of the petitioner in the pay register of the third respondent college. 16. The petitioner is only receiving honorarium for the post of NCC Associate Officer. Therefore, the substantive post hold by the petitioner is that of Associate Professor /Head of Malayalam Department. Hence, the transfer made to the college where there is no NCC unit cannot in any way affect the service benefits of the writ petitioner. 17. It is further contended on the side of the petitioner that the vacancy to which the petitioner was deployed has already been filled up by another candidate by Sri Devi Kumari Women's College management. The learned Additional Advocate General has submitted that the management of that college has not sent any proposal for approval. It could be seen from the records that the redeployment order has been passed on 16.08.2024 and it has been communicated to Sri Devi Kumari Womens College at Kuzhithurai. Therefore, it is not known how an appointment order was issued in favour of a third party to the said post on 23.09.2024. Therefore, it is for the Directorate of Collegiate Education to take call upon granting approval to such appointment. In such circumstances, there is no impediment for the writ petitioner to join the transferred post. 18. The NCC Unit of the third respondent College has already been handed over to a care taker Mr.M.Thanumalaya Perumal and Women's being taken care of by Mrs.Chamundi. In such circumstances, the contention of the petitioner that NCC Unit in the third respondent college would suffer for want of Associate Officer is not factually correct. 19. The order of redeployment clearly points out that due to fall in students strength, the petitioner is deployed to another college and he is entitled to be repatriated to the parent college, in case of increase in the students strength. 19. The order of redeployment clearly points out that due to fall in students strength, the petitioner is deployed to another college and he is entitled to be repatriated to the parent college, in case of increase in the students strength. In such circumstances, no prejudice would be caused to the writ petitioner by way of impugned deployment order. 20. A contempt petition has been filed in Contempt Petition (MD).No. 2503 of 2024 by the writ petitioner alleging violation of interim order of stay. It is reported by the respondent management that the petitioner was permitted to join duty. Recording the same, the contempt petition stands closed. 21. In view of the above said deliberations, there are no merits in the writ petition and the writ petition stands dismissed. The Contempt Petition stands closed. No costs Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.