G.Vinodhini v. The Chairman
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 26-03-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE P.T. ASHA and WMP No.10907 of 2026 G.Vinodhini D/o. S.Ganesan, Ponmalarpalayam, Kondalam Post, Paramathi Velur Taluk, Namakkal district.
..Petitioner(s) Vs
1. The Chairman Teachers Recruitment Board, EVK Sampath Maaligai, College road, Chennai 06.
2. The Controller of Examinations Teachers Recruitment Board, EVK Sampath Maaligai, College road, Chennai 06 ..Respondent(s) PRAYER: Writ Petition has been filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of mandamus calling for records relating to the order of the 2nd respondent made in Na.Ka.No. 1869/ CV2- S1/ 2019 dated 27.01.2026 to quash the same and to consequently direct the respondents to extend all consequential benefits arising thereto. For Petitioner(s):
Mr.L.Chandrakumar For Respondent(s):
Mr.R.Siddharth Standing Counsel
ORDER
The writ petition is filed for the below relief: "calling for records relating to the order of the 2nd respondent made in Na.Ka.No. 1869/ CV2- S1/ 2019 dated 27.01.2026 to quash the same and to consequently direct the respondents to extend all consequential benefits arising thereto.".
2. The brief facts which has culminated in the filing of this writ petition are set out below:
2.1. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner after obtaining M.Sc., Degree in Botany from Kandasamy Kandar's College, Vellore, had obtained M.Phil., (Botany) from Periyar University, Salem, in the year 2004. Thereafter, she joined as a Lecturer (Botany) as a management staff from December, 2002. Between 2010 and 2012, she had enrolled for Ph.D., in Botany with the CMJ University, Shillong, Megalaya and had submitted her thesis and completed all the formalities as per the Regulations and was awarded Ph.D., in Botany. 2.2.Pursuant to obtaining the above degree, she had applied for the post of Assistant Professor under the Teachers Recruitment Board since she possessed educational qualifications of M.Sc., M.Phil., and Ph.D., with teaching
experience of six years in aided colleges in Tamil Nadu. The petitioner, therefore, was eligible for the said post as she had added advantage of being in the MBC Women category. However, to her shock and surprise, when the results of the selection were made known, her marks were omitted for the Ph.D., secured by her. She therefore, made a representation dated 03.12.2013 for consideration of her claim. She would submit that the said observation of the authorities was also biased and discriminatory as they had awarded marks to Mr.M.Senthil Kumar and Balakrishna who had obtained their Ph.D., degree from very same CMJ University.
2.3.She had therefore, filed a writ petition in W.P.No.1078 of 2014 seeking consideration of her claim. The said writ petition was allowed by an order dated 16.02.2018 with a direction to the Teachers Recruitment Board to verify her Ph.D., and to decide the same within a period of two months. It appears that the second respondent had addressed the CMJ University at Shillong seeking a report with reference to the genuineness of the Ph.D., degree. The response was received from the said university stating that there was no infirmity in the grant of Ph.D., However, the said University had not responded to the query raised by the respondents as to the mode of study. Therefore, the impugned order rejecting the request of the petitioner came to be passed. Challenging the same, the petitioner is before this Court.
2.4.The respondents had filed a counter affidavit, in which, it has been stated that pursuant to the orders passed in W.P.No.1077, 1078, 1079 of 2014, a letter was addressed to the CMJ University, Meghalaya, regarding the authenticity of Ph.D., degree in Botany. Though in their reply, the University had stated that the Ph.D., degree was authentic, mode of study was not mentioned. Thereafter, the Teachers Recruitment Board had sent one more letter asking for the mode of study. To this, a response dated 04.02.
2019 was received, wherein the Director of Higher and Technical Education, Meghalaya, had stated that the admission of students during the year 2010-2012 and the degrees obtained by them was declared illegal and the students were given an opportunity to make a representation before the State Governments and after hearing them, results were sent individually. Since the Board itself declared the degree as illegal, the petitioner cannot seek right to the post. 2.5.The respondents would further submit that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.A.Nos.9694 and 9695 of 2024 had settled the legal position regarding the degrees awarded by the said University being false. Therefore, they sought for the dismissal of the writ petition.
3. Heard the learned Counsel on either side and perused the materials available on records.
4. The judgment made in the case of CMJ Foundation vs State in SLP (C) No.19617 of 2013 by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, would read as follows:
"6.On the basis of facts and circumstances available it is concluded that the university committed the following grave irregularities:
..........................
vii)It is offering distance education programme outside the boundaries of Meghalaya and outside India. These actions are in gross violation of UGC Regulations and Guidelines.
viii)Total students enrolled by CMJ University as per information submitted by the University in 2010-11: 176, 2011-12: 469, 2012-13: 2734. All these admissions are illegal as all its actions are db initio void in absence of a legally appointed Chancellor."
It appears that the University had filed an appeal in C.A.Nos.9694 and 9695 of 2024. The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India referred to the order passed in SLP(C)No.19617 of 2013 and had affirmed the decision of the State Government in dissolving the CMJ University and directions were issued to the State Government to take appropriate measures pursuant to the affirmation of the decision to dissolve the CMJ University.
5.In the earlier order, the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has clearly held that the admissions in the University between 2010-2011 to 2012-13 was
illegal and void ab initio. Therefore, it is clear that the degree obtained by the students during the said period is void.
In the light of the above judgment, I see no reason to interfere with the impugned order and accordingly, this writ petition stands dismissed. Connected miscellaneous petition is closed. No costs.
26-03-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order ssa To 1.The Chairman Teachers Recruitment Board, EVK Sampath Maaligai, College road, Chennai 06.
2.The Controller of Examinations Teachers Recruitment Board, EVK Sampath Maaligai, College road, Chennai 06
P.T.ASHA, J.
ssa 26-03-2026