Saturday, November 14, 2009

WRIT PETITIION AGAINST THE DISMISSAL OF TEACHING AND NON TEACHING STAFF OF PRIVATE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION

(1) S. Sendhilkumar; (2) S. Kumar; (3) S. Gopi; (4) T. S. Raja v Angalamman College of Engineering and Technology, Tiruchirappalli: ( W.P(Md)Nos.6988 to 6991 of 2008)




In the above case, Madras High Court in a writ petition against dismissal of staff of an unaided private engineering college , pointed out that the Supreme Court in Krishnamacharyalu’s case (1997(3) SCC 571) had held that private unaided educational institutions also were amenable to writ jurisdiction because they performed public duties by providing educational opportunities. Further enlarged the scope of application of Article 226 for the non-teaching staff of the unaided private engineering college and the court said while refuting on the contention raised by counsel for the Tiruchi college that the non-teaching staff did not perform any public duty such as imparting education, “Though this contention appears to be very attractive, I am not persuaded by the same. While reading apex court judgements, one should not try to interpret them. The law laid down in those rulings binds the High Court and the latter was expected only to understand the judgement and the dictum there under in letter and spirit. If read in this context, it would keep things beyond the pale of doubt that the Supreme Court in Krishnamacharyalu’s case (1997(3) SCC 571) had held that the functions of the entire educational institution, as one unit, amounted to public duty” and further “Here, for imparting education, even non-teaching staff in the college are also doing some job. In the absence of non-teaching staff, the institution cannot run… Therefore, the writ remedy is available to them,”


No comments: