S.S.SUNDAR,J. - (1.) This Writ Appeal is preferred by the respondents 2 and 3 in the Writ Petition . as against the order passed.
(2.) The first appellant is the Secretary of Arignar Anna College by designation and the second appellant is the person who is the Secretary of the said college. The first respondent in this appeal is the petitioner in. and the Writ Petition was filed for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to extend the service of the petitioner as Associate Professor and Head of the Department till the end of this academic year 2018-2019 by considering his representation dated 11.10.2018.
(3.) The brief facts that are necessary for the disposal of this appeal are as follows: 3.1. The first respondent/writ petitioner joined Arignar Anna College in the year 1990 and he was promoted as Senior Lecturer in 1998 and at present he is working as Associate Professor in Physics and Head of the Department of Physics. The first respondent was to retire on 31.01.2019 on attaining the age of superannuation. 3.2. While the first respondent herein was on duty on 09.10.2017, there was a clash between the first respondent herein and one Mr.Kalaivanan, who is also an Associate Professor of the college. Both the teachers have given a complaint against each other as if the other had assaulted. The second appellant appointed an Advocate as an Enquiry Officer to enquire into the matter by communication dated 10.10.2017. The Enquiry Officer was requested to furnish a report within ten days to take further action on this issue. The Enquiry Officer also issued a notice to the first respondent calling upon him to appear for the enquiry on 13.10.2017 in the office of the Secretary. The first respondent filed a Writ Petition in W.P.(MD)No.19453 of 2017 before this Court to quash the communication dated 10.10.2017 by which the second appellant informed the first respondent regarding the appointment of the Enquiry Officer to enquire into the incident on 09.10.2017 and the subsequent notice dated 13.10.2017 issued to the first respondent to attend the enquiry. The said Writ Petition was filed mainly on the apprehension that the Enquiry Officer appointed by the second respondent is going to file an adverse report against the first respondent and that the first appellant would suspend the first respondent teacher. The first respondent made some allegations against the appellants. In the Writ Petition filed by the first respondent in W.P.(MD)No.19453 of 2017, the learned Single Judge of this Court has granted an order of interim stay of the proceedings dated 10.10.2017 and the notice dated 13.10.2017. 3.3. During the pendency of the Writ Petition, the first respondent submitted a representation to the first appellant requesting the first appellant to permit the first respondent to continue in service till the end of the academic year namely May, 2019 as his date of retirement fell on 31.01.2019. It is not in dispute that by virtue of Rule 16A of Grant in Aid Code, a teacher will be permitted to continue in service on re-employment till the closure of the college on summer vacation subject to the condition that the performance in work and conduct of the teacher is satisfactory and he is physically fit to continue in service. 3.4. It is also not in dispute that on the proposal submitted by the Secretary of the College, the Joint Director of Collegiate Education has to permit the teacher to continue in service on re- employment till the academic year on satisfying that the performance and conduct of the teacher are satisfactory and the teacher is physically fit to continue in service. In the present case, the physical fitness of the first respondent is not in question and the first respondent has also obtained a certificate from the Chief Civil Surgeon, Kanyakumari Medical College, regarding the physical fitness. The representation of the first respondent was placed before the College Committee of the appellants on 30.11.2018. After referring to the pendency of the Writ Petition filed by the first respondent, the College Committee passed a resolution not to recommend in favour of continuing the first respondent for re- employment till the academic year. The said resolution of the College Committee was forwarded to the second respondent herein along with the application submitted by the first respondent for re- employment. The proposal was submitted by the appellants on 17.12.2018 along with the resolution of the College Committee. 3.5.It is in the said circumstances, the first respondent filed the Writ Petition in for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus directing the appellants and the Joint Director of Collegiate Education/respondent in the Writ Petition to extend the service of the petitioner as Associate Professor and Head of the Department of the college till the end of the academic year 2018-2019. ;