THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM: THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN AND MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA ORDER RESERVED ON : 08.04.2022 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON : 30.06.2021 PRE-DELIVERY ORDER IN Contempt Petition Nos. 732, 733, 734 and 1152 of 2021 Contempt Petition No.732 of 2021. 12. In the light of the above, we are prima facie of the considered opinion that the respondents are guilty of wilful disobedience of the order dated 13.02.2020 passed in W.A.No. 1216 to 1218 of 2016 confirming the common order dated 30.04.2015 passed in W.P.Nos. 29772 of 2004, 20366 of 2004 and 8989 of 2011. 13. We therefore issue Statutory Notice to the Respondents returnable by One month

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS CORAM:
THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE S.VAIDYANATHAN AND
MRS.JUSTICE N.MALA

ORDER RESERVED ON : 08.04.2022 ORDER PRONOUNCED ON : 30.06.2021

PRE-DELIVERY ORDER IN

Contempt Petition Nos. 732, 733, 734
and 1152 of 2021

Contempt Petition No.732 of 2021

Dr.S.Chennaippan.

Vs

…1st Petitioner

1. Dr.C.Jothi Venkateswaran,
The Director of Collegiate Education, College Road, Chennai-600 006.

2. Dr.K.Murugan, Registrar,
The Bharathiar University, Coimbatore-641 046.
…Respondent 2 & 3

3. Rev.Dr.D.Chandrasekaran, Bishop and Chairman, Bishop Thorp College, Thirupur District,

Dharapuram-638 657.

Contempt Petition No.733 of 2021

…Respondent

Dr.D.Ubendhiran

1. Dr.C.Jothi Venkateswaran,
The Director of Collegiate Education, College Road, Chennai-600 006.

Vs.

…3rd Petitioner

2. Dr.V.Kalaiselvi,
Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Race Course Road,
Coimbatore-18.

3. Dr.K.Murugan, Registrar,
The Bharathiar University, Coimbatore-641 046.

…Respondents 4 to 6

4. Rev.Dr.D.Chandrasekaran, The Secretary,
Bishop Thorp College, Diocesan Office, Puthur Trichy-17

…Respondent

Contempt Petition No.734 of 2021

S.Vasudevan

…1st petitioner
Vs

1. Dr.C.Jothi Venkateswaran,
The Director of Collegiate Education,

College Road, Chennai-600 006.

2. Dr.V.Kalaiselvi,
Joint Director of Collegiate Education, Race Course Road,
Coimbatore-18.

3. Dr.K.Murugan, Registrar,
The Bharathiar University, Coimbatore-641 046.

4. Rev.Dr.D.Chandrasekaran, Bishop and Chairman, Bishop Thorp College, Ellis Nagar Post-638 657. Dharapuram
Thirupur District

…Respondents 2 to 4

…Respondent

Contempt Petition No.1152 of 2021

1.K.Selvarajan 2.V.Annathurai

Vs
Rt.Rev.Dr.D.Chandrasekaran, The Secretary,
Bishop Thorp College, Dharapuram-638 657.

…Petitioners

…Respondent

Prayer in Contempt Petition No.732 of 2021:

Contempt petition filed Under Section 11 of Contempt of Court Act,1971

praying to issue notice to respondents and punish for disobeying the common order dated 13.02.2020 passed in W.A.No.1216 to 1218 of 2016 confirming the Common order dated 30.04.2015, passed in W.P.No.29772 and 10366 of 2004 and 8989 of
2011.

Prayer in Contempt Petition No.733 of 2021

Contempt petition filed Under Section 11 of Contempt of Court Act,1971 praying to issue notice to respondents and punish for disobeying the common order dated 13.02.2020 passed in W.A.No.1216 of 2016 confirming the Common order dated 30.04.2015, passed in W.P.No.10366 of 2004.

Prayer in Contempt Petition No.734 of 2021

Contempt petition filed Under Section 11 of Contempt of Court Act,1971 praying to issue notice to respondents and punish for disobeying the common order dated 13.02.2020 passed in W.A.No.1218 of 2016 confirming the Common order dated 30.04.2015, passed in W.P.No.8989 of 2011.

Prayer in Contempt Petition No.1152 of 2021

Contempt petition filed Under Section 11 of Contempt of Court Act,1971 praying to issue notice to respondent and punish the respondent for the deliverate

violation of the orders of this Hon’ble Court dated 13.02.2020 in Writ Appeal No.1216 of 2016.

COMMON ORDER

[Order of the Court was made by S.VAIDYANATHAN,J. and N.MALA,J.]

As the contempt petitions arise out of a common order dated 13.02.2020 passed in the writ appeals, the same are taken up together and a common order is passed in these contempt petitions. The contempt petition Nos. 732, 733 and 734 of 2021 are filed with a prayer to punish the respondents in the contempt petitions for wilful disobedience of the common order dated 13.02.2020 passed in WA.No. 1216 to 1218 of 2016 confirming the common order dated 30.04.2015 passed in W.P.Nos. 29772 of 2004, 10366 of 2004 and 8989 of 2011.

2. The brief facts of the case leading to the above said contempt petitions are as follows.
The writ petitioners in all the three writ petitions sought direction to the third respondent college in the writ petition to pay the petitioners who were faculty members of the college UGC scales of pay as applicable to the college teachers. In one of the writ petition’s viz. W.P. No. 29772 of 2004, a further relief was sought

directing the third respondent college not to close B.A. Co-operation department in the third respondent college without following the procedure under Section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Private College Regulation Act. The learned Judge vide common order dated 30.04.2015 held that the relief of closure of B.A. Cooperation department was infructuous and hence dismissed the same. The learned Judge in so far as the relief of payment of salary on UGC scales of pay to the teachers was concerned, directed the official respondent/ Education Department to consider and pass appropriate orders, in the light of the order passed in W.P. Nos. 8144 and 37099 of 2001 dated 05.06.2012 as confirmed in W.A. Nos. 2299 and 2300 of 2012 dated 22.01.2015 with arrears within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The third respondent therein aggrieved by the common order of the learned single Judge preferred appeals in W.A. Nos. 1216 to 1218 of 2016 and the Hon’ble First Division bench was pleased to partly allow the writ petition. The Hon’ble First Division Bench on the question of grant of UGC scales to the teaching staff of the appellant college held that the same was no longer res integra in view of the Division Bench Judgment of the Hon’ble Court dated 22.04.2015 in W.A.Nos. 2299 and 2300 of 2012.

3. The petitioners earlier filed contempt petition’s in contempt petition

Nos. 1248 to 1250 of 2016, which were dismissed on 18.09.2020 on the ground that the writ appeals filed against the single Judge’s order dated 30.04.2015 were pending before the Hon’ble Division Bench. The learned Judge observed that as the writ appeals were pending the contempt petition’s were to be filed before the Division Bench and thus disposed the contempt petitions by granting liberty to the contempt petitioners to work out their remedy in a manner known to law.

4. The petitioners sent a legal notice to the respondents to comply with the order passed in W.P. Nos. 29772 and 10366 of 2004 and 8989 of 2011 dated 30.04.2015 as confirmed by the order dated 13.02.2020 passed by the Hon’ble Division Bench in W.A.Nos. 1216 to 1218 of 2016. As the respondents failed to comply with the above said orders, the present contempt petitions were filed for wilful disobedience of the orders passed by this Hon’ble Court in W.A. Nos. 1216 to 1218 of 2016 dated 13.02.2020.

5. According to the contempt petitioners they were fully eligible and qualified for the posts and hence denial of UGC scales of pay inspite of the orders of this Hon’ble Court is deprecable. The contempt petitioners submitted the following factual particulars in support of their claim for UGC scales of pay. The

contempt petitioners joined as Lecturer’s in the third respondent college and their appointment was approved by the affiliating university i.e. Bharathiar University on 16.04.1993. The Bharathiar University through the said letter approved the eligibility of the contempt petitioners on the basis of their qualifications for the post of Lecturer. It is seen that the contempt petitioner S.Chennaiappan joined as Lecturer, was subsequently promoted as Senior Lecturer, Selection Grade Lecturer and retired as an Associate professor on 31.07.2017. Shri. S.Chenniappan was holding M.Phil degree even at the time of entry in the college as lecturer, he obtained his Ph.d., degree on 06.07.2012. The contempt petitioner D.Ubendhiran joined as Lecturer and was subsequently promoted as Senior Lecturer and Senior Lecturer Selection Grade. Shri. D. Ubendhiran also possessed M.Phil degree at the time of his appointment as Lecturer in the third respondent college. The contempt petitioner S.Vasudevan joined as Lecturer in the third respondent college and his qualification was approved by the Bharathiar University. Shri. S.Vasudevan joined as Lecturer and he is presently an Associate professor and Head, Department of Commerce in the third respondent college and his date of retirement is 31.03.2023.

6. The third respondent college filed counters in the contempt petition stating that the UGC scales where admissible based on the qualification acquired

by the staff from stage to stage after entry into service and further stated that the contempt petitioners were required to apply under the UGC prescribed proforma for promotion under Career Advancement Scheme.

7. In support of the said stand of the third respondent college, the third respondent college relied on para 11 of the order of the Hon’ble First Division Bench in the common order dated 13.02.2020 in W.A.Nos.1216 to 1218 of 2016. The order passed in the said writ appeal is extracted below:

“The next question is with regard to the grant of U.G.C. Scale to the teaching staff of the Institution. This, according to us, has been rightly observed by the learned Single Judge to have attained a finality, in the light of the judgment dated 05.06.2012 in W.P.No.37099 of 2007. The said judgment categorically holds in teaching staff to be entitled to the
U.G.C. Scale in respect of all the Institutions which form part of the Association that had preferred the said writ petition. It is undisputed that the appellant College was and is a part of the said Association and therefore, in our opinion, the

judgment dated 05.06.2012 is binding on the appellant. Further, even though a writ appeal was filed against the said judgment in W.A.Nos.2299 and 2300 of 2012, the judgment dated 22.01.2015 delivered therein, nowhere reverses the said finding of the learned Single Judge in the judgment dated 05.06.2012. The aforesaid declaration that the U.G.C scales are admissible and the teaching staff of the Institution are entitled to the same, therefore, remains no longer res integra and stands sealed with the aforesaid judgment. The learned Single Judge having held so, has in our opinion also arrived at the correct conclusion and we see no reason to differ from the view taken by him.
10…..

11.One of the argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellant is that the teaching staff which is claiming such entitlement, is always subject to the fulfillment of their qualifications as prescribed by the University Grants Commission from time to time. It goes without saying that the entitlement of a salary against a post, has to be in accordance

with law and obviously subject to the qualifications prescribed for the said post. We, therefore, see no reason to interfere at this stage leaving it open to the appellant Institution to take a decision in the event, a member of the teaching staff does not possess the requisite qualification. The issue will, therefore, have to be accordingly, dealt with by the Director of Collegiate Education, Government of Tamil Nadu, in the event, any dispute is raised in this regard.”

8. What emerges from a reading of the said order is that the Hon’ble Division Bench has accepted the plea of the contempt petitioners that they are entitled to UGC scales of pay as the Hon’ble First Division Bench felt that the issue was sealed by the judgment of the Hon’ble Division Bench dated 22.01.2015 in W.A.Nos.2299 and 2300 of 2012.

9. In our view the third respondent college is trying to skirt the issue by inserting a new case of eligibility on the basis of CAS promotion. The issue in the writ petition was not about CAS promotion under the UGC norms but on the payment of basic salary under the UGC scales. The third respondent college also

understood that the issue was only regarding the payment of salary under UGC scales of pay and not on CAS promotion. The grounds of appeal filed in the writ appeal with reference to the issue regarding payment of UGC scales is extracted here under.

“G. The Hon’ble Judge ought to have seen that there was no contract between the staff and the college in regard to the payment of salary in the UGC scale of pay; and that the college never agreed to pay such scales of pay either at the time of appointment or at any other point of time.
H. The Hon’ble Judge ought to have considered the fact that the employment in the college being in the realm of private contracts, the Government as well as the affiliating University lacked the authority to enforce such terms like UGC scales of pay in the contract of employment, particularly when the college is run on self-financing basis.
I. The Hon’ble Judge ought to have noticed that the UGC scales of pay might be relevant in the case of Universities, Government Colleges and Government Aided Colleges where

there is 100% funding from Public Funds and the appellant college did not fall under those categories.
J. The Hon’ble Judge ought to have seen that the appellant- college was not receiving any kind of financial grant from the Public Funds or from the UGC and that it was a self-financing college which survives with its own funds.
K. The Hon’ble Judge ought to have noticed that education in the appellant-college has been provided as a mission on charitable basis without making any profit and without deriving any income out of it.
L. The Hon’ble Judge ought to have considered the fact that the students of the college hail from very poor economic strata; their parents being mainly industrial labourers and daily-waged workers; and but for this college, these students would not have the opportunity of higher education.
M. The Hon’ble Judge ought to have seen that only a meagre sum of money has been collected as fee from the students to meet out only the day to day expenses and neither any donation nor any capitation fee collected.

N. The Hon’ble Judge ought to have considered that the teaching and non-teaching staff of the college are paid salaries purely from the management-funds and from the nominal fee collected from the students and that if they are to be paid in the UGC scales of pay, the college would face severe financial crisis and eventually its mission of providing low-cost education would be crippled.
P. At any rate, the college being a Minority Educational Institution, the impugned directives of the University with regard to UGC scales of pay would be an infraction upon the fundamental right of administration guarantee to the college under Article 30 of the Constitution.”

10. From the above grounds it is seen that the third respondent college had never raised the issue of CAS promotion and the plea is now raised to sidetrack the issue. It is pertinent to note here that the grounds K, L, M, N were agitated before Hon’ble Division Bench and the Hon’ble Division Bench in the common order dated 13.02.2020 in W.A. Nos. 1216 to 1218 of 2016 outright rejected the submissions based on those grounds.

11. As the Hon’ble First Division Bench in the common order dated 13.02.2020 categorically held that the contempt petitioners are entitled to UGC scales of pay, we are of the view that the third respondent is bound to comply with the same.

12. In the light of the above, we are prima facie of the considered opinion that the respondents are guilty of wilful disobedience of the order dated 13.02.2020 passed in W.A.No. 1216 to 1218 of 2016 confirming the common order dated 30.04.2015 passed in W.P.Nos. 29772 of 2004, 20366 of 2004 and 8989 of 2011.
13. We therefore issue Statutory Notice to the Respondents returnable by

One month

Registry is directed to dispatch the Statutory Notice to the Respondents on or before 14.07.2022 and list before the concerned Division Bench.

[S.V.N.,J.] [N.M.,J.]

Index : Yes/No 30.06.2022
Internet : Yes/No dsn
S.VAIDYANATHAN,J.
and
N.MALA,J.

dsn

PRE-DELIVERY ORDER IN

Contempt Petition Nos. 732, 733, 734
and 1152 of 2021

.06.2022