Minority Institutions Have Autonomy Over Appointment Of Teachers Which Can’t Be Given To Outsiders: Madras HC
The Madras High Court held that the minority institutions have an autonomy over the appointment of teachers which cannot be given in the hands of the outsiders in the name of a selection committee.
The Madurai Bench held thus in a batch of writ petitions preferred by the colleges, seeking quashing of proceedings issued by the University and appointment of individuals as Assistant Professor in the respective colleges.
A Single Bench of Justice R.N. Manjula observed, “The members of the selection committee includes the outsiders. By inducting them and giving them the power to select the appointees for the minority institution would amount to allowing them to interfere with the administration of the minority institutions. As the appointment of teachers is an administrative function over which the minority institutions have got their own autonomy, it can not be given in the hands of the outsiders in the name of a selection committee. What cannot be done directly cannot be allowed to be done indirectly as well.”
Senior Advocate Issac Mohanlal appeared for the petitioners while Additional Government Pleader (AGP) M. Siddharthan, Government Advocate T. Amjad Khan, Advocates T. Sakthi Kumaran and Mahaboob Athiff appeared for the respondents.
In this case, the petitioners were the colleges affiliated to the Madurai Kamaraj University and they were minority institutions. Except the Rajapalayam Raja's College, all other colleges were autonomous institutions as well. They made appointments to the posts of 'Assistant Professor' and 'Principal'. When the qualification of approval for the appointees was sought from the University, it refused to grant approval stating that the appointments have been made without forming a Selection Committee as per the U.G.C. (University Grants Commission) Regulation -2018. Hence, they challenged the same before the High Court via writ petitions.
The High Court after hearing the arguments from the both sides, said, “No doubt the quality of education and the quality of teachers appointed to the post is very much essential. It is not only in the interest of the students who aspire to achieve excellence but also in the interest of the nation. If the appointees does not possess the mandatory qualification, then there may be some room for interference in the national interest.”
So far as the non-autonomous but minority institutions are concerned, the Court noted that, it has a one level protection under Article 30(1) of the Constitution of India. It said that, when the law is laid down in respect of non-applicability of U.G.C. Regulation 2000, the replication of the same in later U.G.C. Regulations 2010 and 2018 can also be of the same consequence and they need not be viewed in any different angle.
“Since there are checks and balances to ensure the fair and proper administration of the minority institutions even though they have the administrative autonomy, it is needless to induct any outsiders in the form of selection committee to disturb the calm water administration of the minority institutions”, it added.
The Court further enunciated that, when one regulation of U.G.C. prescribes certain standards and autonomous status is conferred due to the compliance of the same, the other U.G.C regulation cannot stultify the same. It also observed that the regulation concerning selection committee cannot be mandated against the minority institution as that will go counter-productive and self-contradictive to their well approved autonomous status.
“Hence the above two U.G.C Regulations of U.G.C. and hence in all fairness these Regulations have to be read harmoniously and such reading will also leave only one inference that the selection of faculties in the cadre of assistant professors to minority institutions shall not be compelled to be made through any selection committee contemplated in the U.G.C Regulations”, it concluded.
The Court, therefore, directed the University to re-consider the applications submitted by the petitioner-colleges to grant qualification approval for the appointments made by them without insisting the selection committee procedure contemplated in the U.G.C Regulations-2018.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the writ petitions and quashed the impugned proceedings.
Cause Title- The Principal & Secretary Lady Doak College v. The State of Tamil Nadu & Ors.
