P N RETHINEKUMAR Vs. C SENTHILVEL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision has been preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 05.11.2004 in E.A.No.135 of 1998 in O.S.No.68 of 1948 as amended in O.S.No.17 of 1960 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Mayiladuthurai.Prayer in CRP(NPD).No.2707 of 2004:-THIS revision has been preferred under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 05.11.2004 in E.A.No.134 of 1998 in O.S.No.68/48 as amended in O.S.No.17/60 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Mayiladuthurai.)CRP(NPD).No.133 of 2007:- CRP (NPD).133 of 2007 is directed against the order passed in EA.No.13 of 2005 in O.S.No.17 of 1960 (scheme decree) amended from O.S.No.68 of 1948. EA.No.13 of 2004 was filed under Section 151 CPC to remove the respondent Senthilvel from the membership of AVC Educational Committee.

(2.) THE petitioner in EA.No.13 of 2004 would state that the respondent was appointed as a member of AVC Educational Committee by the Court and was also elected as a Secretary of the said Educational Committee. According to the petitioner, the respondent has not shown any interest in the welfare of the AVC Educational Committee, but has acted against the interest of AVC Educational Committee by misusing her powers. According to the petitioner, the following grounds are alleged against the respondent for removing him from the membership of AVC Educational Committee:-1) On 3.12.2001 six lectures have been appointed in the AVC Arts College. At the interference of the respondent the appointment of one of the candidates was cancelled and in his place another person was appointed. On 24.12.2001 one Baskaran was appointed as Administrative Assistant in the Zoology Department of AVC Arts College since he has not joined in the above said post, on 3.1.2002 one J.Pandiyan was terminated from his service on the ground of over employment. THE above said Pandiyan was terminated from service only within 10 days from the date of his appointment with ulterior motive. 2) One Ramakrishnan was appointed in the Administrative Section as Senior Superintendent ten days after his retirement at the pay scale of Rs.9,000/- per month. THE said action by the respondent was in a way indirectly extending his age of retirement. 3) An interview for the appointment of Lecturers for 13 department was conducted and about 492 applications were received. THE respondent without cancelling the leave applied by the Principal had directed the Principal to attend the college on 16.5.2002 and had approved 184 applications alone. 4) On 1.3.2003 for the construction of building for the college an estimate was prepared and the said estimate was got approved by circulating the same to AVC Educational Committee and the construction work was started on 7.3.2003, but no work order was issued to the contractors.5) With the aid of United States of America, a project by name U.S.Wild Life Project was started in the AVC Arts College. At that time with an aim to conduct the project in a successful manner the petitioner herein while he was working as the President of the AVC Educational Committee had formed an experts committee. THE first meeting of the said experts committee was conducted on 29.9.2001. THE next meeting was proposed to be convened on 6.10.2001 in order to regulate the function of the above said expert committee, but the respondent / secretary had sidelined the said experts committee and has released the project investigator on 21.6.2003. THE accounts for the said experts committee was also not handed over in the said meeting. 6) For the purpose of dispersing advance amount to the contractors, bank guaranty is required. But after the respondent has become the Secretary, contrary to the above said convention, had sanctioned several lakhs of rupees to the Contractors for the purpose of constructing the Computer Block at AVC College on the basis of corporate guaranty instead of bank guaranty.7) To Sathiyapal India Company Ltd, even before the completion of the building construction of the AVC Polytechnic final bill was prepared and amount was dispersed. But as per the Rules of the College without prior sanction the Secretary can spent only upto Rs.1,000/-m, in case of emergency without any circular the Secretary can spend upto Rs.20,000/- But the respondent as a Secretary had spent Rs.31,196 /- without any prior permission. 8) Like that the respondent without following the Rules had also spent Rs.1,33,000/- on 29.9.2003 for the purpose of purchasing cements. At the time of meeting of the College Committee of AVC Polytechnic and Engineering college upto Rs.200/- alone is liable to be allowed for the members to meet their traveling expenses, but the respondent had sanction Rs.300/- without obtaining any permission to his relative Lalithasundari to meet her traveling expenses. 9) For the purpose of constructing a compound wall for AVC Engineering College as well as Polytechnic College for different contractors the work was entrusted at the rate of Rs.300/- per meter and Rs.200/- per meter. But in favour of M/s.Sathiyapa India Company Ltd., a company owned by a related of one of the members of the AVC Educational Committee by name S.Karthikeyan, the respondent has sanction Rs.511/- per meter.10) THE accounts pertaining to U.S.Wild Life Project without any recognition the respondent had sent the same to the Central Government and also to the foreign agencies on 2.7.2003 and 4.8.2002 respectively. This creates suspicion on the said accounts submitted by the respondent. On 26.2.2004 sanction was requested in respect of the articles received in connection with the said project to handover the same to another company. But when the agreement prepared for projects 1 & 2 revealed that several changes have been made in the same. Out of 8 pages of the agreement 6 pages alone were removed, instead new pages were found inserted. This can been seen from the Roman Letter given as 'I' & 'II' in those newly added pages. As per the Rule 10(g) of the Educational Committee, the respondent alone is responsible for the above said manipulation of records. So on the above ground the petitioner had sort the indulgence of the Scheme Court to remove the respondent from the Educational Committee of AVC College.

(3.) THE order passed in EA.No.135 of 1998 in O.S.No.68 of 1948 as amended in O.S.No.17 of 1960 on the file of the Principal Subordinate Judge, Mayiladuthurai, is under challenge in this revision. THE same application was filed by the petitioner to disqualify and remove the third respondent Mr.E.S.Ganapathy from the membership of the second respondent - Education Committee.