Dr.M.Venkatachalapathy v. The Registrar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 10.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE C.KUMARAPPAN and W.M.P.Nos.22708 and 22711 of 2025 Dr.M.Venkatachalapathy ... Petitioner Vs.
1.The Registrar, University of Madras, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
2.The Convener Committee, Represented by its Members, University of Madras, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
... Respondents Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call for the records relating to the official communication No.D1(B)/TE/2025/372 dated 30.05.2025, quash the same and consequently direct the respondents to restore the re-employment period i.e. from 01.02.2025 to 30.06.2025 AN instead of 01.02.2025 to 31.05.2025.
1/6
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Rajasekaran For Respondents : Mr.D.Ravichander
O R D E R
The instant writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order dated 30.05.2025.
2. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the petitioner had retired from service on 31.01.2025. However, on a reemployment basis, he was permitted to continue till the end of the academic year i.e., from 01.02.2025 to 21.05.2025. The learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that inspite of such specific order, all off sudden without even serving the notice personally, on 30.05.2025 unilaterally the respondents have restricted the academic year between 01.02.2025 to 31.05.2025. Therefore, in view of not following the natural justice, the impugned order is to be set aside.
3. The learned counsel for the respondents would submit that 2/6
re-employment till the end of the academic year will not confer any right upon the individual and it must be construed only for the benefit of the students. The concerned teacher or professor is permitted to continue only for the duration of the academic year. In the case in hand, there is no impediment or difficulty for the students, as their academic year itself ends on 31.05.2025. Hence, prayed to dismiss this writ petition.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents.
5. The substance of the petitioner's contention is that he was not given notice prior to the issuance of the termination order dated 30.05.2025. It is pertinent to mention that the petitioner had already retired on 31.01.2025, and his present assignment with the respondent was only on a reemployment basis, and that too until the completion of the academic year. Though it is referred to in the order dated 14.03.2025, that he may continue till 30.06.2025, the reduction of the period will not have any impact on the fundamental rights of the petitioner. The permission for the petitioner to continue till the academic year was granted solely for the benefit of the 3/6
students, whereas, this Court could not find any difficulty faced by the students in continuing their education.
6. In view of the same, this Court do not find any merits in this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected writ miscellaneous petitions are closed. 10.06.2025 jas Index : Yes/No Speaking order To 4/6
1.The Registrar, University of Madras, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
2.The Convener Committee, Represented by its Members, University of Madras, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.
5/6
C.KUMARAPPAN, J.
jas and W.M.P.Nos.22708 and 22711 of 2025 10.06.2025 6/6