{"id":136748,"date":"2007-10-01T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2007-09-30T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2"},"modified":"2015-12-09T19:52:10","modified_gmt":"2015-12-09T14:22:10","slug":"j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2","title":{"rendered":"J.Chelladurai vs Madurai Kamaraj University on 1 October, 2007"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
J.Chelladurai vs Madurai Kamaraj University on 1 October, 2007<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT\n\n\nDATED : 01\/10\/2007\n\n\nCORAM:\nTHE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.CHANDRU\n\n\nW.P (MD) No.2330 of 2006\nand\nW.P.M.P. (MD) Nos.2554 and 2555 of 2006\n\n\nJ.Chelladurai\nCorrespondent\nJeyaraj Chelladurai College\nPeriyakulam, Theni District \t...  \tPetitioner\n\n\nvs.\n\n\nMadurai Kamaraj University\nRep. by its Registrar\nMadurai Palgalai Nagar\nMadurai\t\t\t\t... \tRespondent\n\n\nPetition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a Writ of\nCertiorarified Mandamus calling for the records relating to the impugned order\nof the respondent in ref. No.EDP\/Examination\/2005 dated 07.02.2006 and quash the\nsame and consequently direct the respondent to permit the petitioner to admit\nthe students in their college for the academic year 2006-2007.\n\n\n!For petitioner\t    \t...\tMr.M.Vaidyalingam\n\n\n^For Respondent \t...\tMr.R.Janakiramulu\n\t\n\n:ORDER\n<\/pre>\n
\tThe petitioner is the Correspondent of Jeyaraj Chelladurai College,
\nPeriyakulam and in this writ petition, the challenge is to the order dated
\n07.02.2006 passed by the Registrar of the respondent Madurai Kamaraj University
\ndemanding a sum of Rs.1,02,099\/- towards the expenses incurred for conduct of
\nexaminations held in the petitioner College during November 2004 and
\nparticularly April 2005.   They were also warned  by the same order that if the
\namounts are not paid, the Management will not be permitted to admit students for
\nthe academic year 2006-07.\n<\/p>\n
\t2.\tIn that writ petition, notice was ordered on 10.3.2006 and was
\nformally admitted on 10.4.2006.   Even though an interim stay was sought for in
\nW.P.M.P. (MD) No.2555 of 2006 to stay the proceedings and direction was sought
\nfor in W.P.M.P. (MD) No.2555 of 2006 to conduct examination, only notice was
\nordered initially and when the matter was admitted on 10.4.2006 this Court
\ndirected the petitioner  to pay a sum of Rs.50,000\/- towards the claim made by
\nthe respondent University and on that condition, interim stay was granted.    It
\nis now stated that the amount has been paid already.\n<\/p>\n
\t3.\tI have heard the arguments of Mr.M.Vaidyalingam, learned counsel
\nappearing for the petitioner and Mr.R.Janakiramulu, learned counsel for the
\nrespondent and have perused the records.\n<\/p>\n
\t4.\tThe petitioner College is a private College within the meaning of
\nSection 2(7) the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Act 1976 [for short,
\n‘Private Colleges Act’].   It is also affiliated to the respondent University.
\nWith reference to the admission of students and any disciplinary action and the
\ninternal administration of the college including the conduct of examinations,
\nthe power vest with the  Principal of the College by virtue of Rule 8 of the
\nTamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Rules 1976.\n<\/p>\n
\t5.\tDuring April 2004, the University fixed examination schedule to
\nstart from 19.4.2004.  The Principal of the petitioner College was appointed as
\nChief Superintendent.    But on the morning of 19.4.2004, the University
\nreceived reliable information that two question papers relating to “Income Tax
\nLaw and Practice paper – II” for B.Com degree examination were leaked out by the
\nstaff of the petitioner College.    Therefore, the two examinations were
\ncancelled with immediate effect.\n<\/p>\n
\t6. The University constituted a committee comprising of three Syndicate
\nmembers to visit the College and enquire about the leakage of question papers in
\nrespect of the Colleges in Madurai City.  The Committee constituted for the said
\npurpose, visited a number of Colleges and gathered information.    The Committee
\nsubmitted its report along with relevant documents to the conveners’ committee,
\nmanaging the administration of the University (since the Vice-Chancellor’s  post
\nwas vacant). appointed).  On the basis of the report, a criminal complaint was
\nlodged with the Nagamalai Pudukkottai Police on 22.4.2004 and a case was
\nregistered in Crime No.180 of 2004 for an offence under Section 380 IPC.  On
\ninvestigation, two non-teaching staff members of the College, by name, Ramesh
\nand Senthil, were identified as culprits and they had stealthily removed the
\ncover of the question paper bundle and circulated the same.    The overall
\nresponsibility was fixed on the Chief Superintendent, who is also the Principal
\nof the College.  Because of the leakage of the question papers news reports
\nappeared in the newspapers, it created an embarrassment to the University.\n<\/p>\n
\t7. The report of the three member committee was approved by the conveners’
\ncommittee and it was placed before the Syndicate for further action.  The
\nUniversity was forced to re-schedule the examinations of B.Com Degree  and B.Sc.
\nDegree (Computer Science) to be conducted afresh on 03.5.2004 and 30.4.2004
\nrespectively.     Likewise, the examinations of other subjects were also re-
\nscheduled.     Because of the leakage of question papers, another Professor was
\nappointed to re-set the question papers and the Principal of CPA College, Bodi,
\nwas appointed to act as the Chief Superintendent to conduct the examinations of
\nApril 2004 in the petitioner’s College.  In view of the appointment of an
\noutsider as the Chief Superintendent, further Invigilators were also required
\nfor keeping surveillance over the conduct of the examination.  The University
\nincurred considerable expenditure on this account.\n<\/p>\n
\t8.\tThe matter was placed before the University.   The Syndicate, by a
\nResolution dated 19.6.2004, resolved that no further affiliation for new courses
\n\/ additional strength for the existing courses will be given to the petitioner
\nCollege for three years and the examinations for the academic years 2004-05,
\n2005-06 and 2006-07 in the petitioner College will be conducted by the
\nUniversity and that the entire expenditure will have to be met by the college.
\nFurther, the expenses incurred on the leakage of question papers will also be
\nrecovered from the college.\n<\/p>\n
\t9.\tApart from all these, a show cause notice was issued to the
\npetitioner College as to why it should not be disaffiliated.   After the said
\nnotice was communicated, the petitioner College paid a sum of Rs.35,928\/-
\ntowards the expenditure for re-scheduling the examinations.    The University
\nalso issued another letter to the petitioner College to pay a sum of Rs.50,099\/-
\nand Rs.52,000\/- thereby demanding a total sum of Rs.1,02,099\/- towards the
\nexpenditure incurred by the University for the conduct of examination already
\nheld at the petitioner’s College during November 2004 and April 2005.      It is
\nthis order, which is under challenge in this writ petition as noted above.\n<\/p>\n
\t10.\tLearned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the College
\nManagement was totally at dark as to what transpired in the college during
\nexamination and the Management should not be penalised for the activities of its
\nservants which was obviously done without the approval or knowledge of the
\nManagement.   It was also stated that no opportunity was granted to the College
\nbefore the amount was sought to be recovered.    Since the College is run by a
\nTrust, it will be impossible for them to pay the amount as demanded by the
\nUniversity.    Further, since the criminal case is subjudice, they should not be
\nasked to pay any amount without fixing the responsibility on the persons
\nconcerned.\n<\/p>\n
\t11.\tLearned counsel for the petitioner filed a written submission
\nraising the contention that no notice was given to the Management and hence no
\nliability can be fixed on the Management.    In this context, learned counsel
\nrelied upon the judgment of this Court reported in 1996 (1) M.L.J. 17 [Arumugam
\nPillai Seethai Ammal College   v.  The Registrar, Madurai Kamaraj University<\/a>].
\nThe said judgment arose out of the context where the University has powers to
\nappoint an enquiry committee to go into the collection of capitation fee
\nreceived by a private Management.  In that context, the Court held that the
\nTmail Nadu Educational Institutions (Prohibition of Collection of Capitation
\nFee) Act is a separate code in which University has not been given any role to
\nappoint an Enquiry Committee.   Therefore, that case has no relevance to the
\nfacts of the present case.       The present case relates to the petitioner
\nManagement violating the conditions of affiliation as its staff were responsible
\nfor leaking out the question papers and the credibility of the University was in
\nquestion.\n<\/p>\n
\t12.\tThe other argument that no notice was given to the Management does
\nnot  merit any appeal because the Principal, being the Chief Superintendent
\nappointed by the College, was fully heard and his written statement was also
\naccepted and therefore, there was no question of giving a separate notice to the
\nManagement.    In fact, thanks to the orders of this Court, the petitioner
\nCollege continues to be a recognised examination centre of the University.\n<\/p>\n
\t13.\tThe respondent University has filed a typed set of papers containing
\nthe report of the three Members Committee, which visited the College, as well as
\nthe decision of the Conveners Committee.    It also enclosed the statement of
\nthe Principal of petitioner’s College dated 23.6.2004 blaming the non-teaching
\nstaff for the leakage.    It was on the basis of these materials, the Syndicate
\nof the University arrived at this decision and the due communication was sent to
\nthe Management.\n<\/p>\n
\t14. So far as the petitioner Management is concerned, it has got no
\nexplanation to offer with reference to the leakage of question papers, which had
\nseriously undermined the prestige of the University in conducting the
\nexaminations and it had demoralized thousands of examinees, who were to take the
\nexaminations.\n<\/p>\n
\t15.\tIn the present case, the demand is neither a fine  amount nor a
\npenalty but only the recovery charges for the service rendered by the
\nUniversity.    If the University had not taken the responsibility of conducting
\nthe examination in the petitioner College, then the examination centre would
\nhave been shifted, and that would have  resulted in further hardship to the
\ninnocent students.    Therefore, the University acted wisely in changing the
\nChief Superintendent, which is a prerogative power of the University.  The
\nUniversity had also took the responsibility of  conducting the examination in
\nthe very same Centre in the interest of the student community at large.     If
\non that count, the University had incurred expenditure, logically, the liability
\nof the same had to be met by the petitioner College.\n<\/p>\n
\t16.\tThe contention of the Management that they were not responsible for
\nthe happenings in the College and, therefore, they should not be mulcted with a
\nliability, cannot be accepted.    By the advent of the Private Colleges Act
\n(Tamil Nadu Act 19 of 1976), the Management of the College alone is entitled to
\nmaintain the property of the College and with reference to the administration of
\na minority College the appointment of teachers and taking disciplinary action,
\nthe power vests with the College management.  Apart from the overall
\nadministration of the College, being vested with the College management, the
\nPrincipal of the College has been made solely responsible for the internal
\nadministration of the College including conducting of classes, admission of
\nstudents and taking disciplinary action against students as well as the conduct
\nof examinations.    It has been further provided that the
\nSecretary\/Correspondent of the College can not interfered with the internal
\nadministration of the College which is the sole prerogative is of the Principal.
\nThe petitioner College though a minority College and they are bound by the
\nprovisions of the Private Colleges Act and the Rules made thereunder except
\nwhere the Act itself exempts them from certain provision.\n<\/p>\n
\t17.\tWith reference to the concept of vicarious liability, the learned
\ncounsel relied upon the judgment of the Supreme Court reported in AIR 1978 SC
\n1263 [State Bank of India  v.  Smt.Shyama Devi<\/a>].    There, it was held that
\nmisappropriation of the Bank employee without depositing the cheque given by a
\ncustomer thereby resulting in a loss to the respondent cannot be said to have
\nbeen committed in the course of employment with the Bank.    In fact, in
\nparagraph 41 of the said Judgment, the Supreme Court noted that the fact of the
\nperson being an employee of the Bank and a friend of one Bhagwati Prasad, gave
\nhim the opportunity of committing the fraud.     It is not known as to how this
\njudgment   is helpful to the case of the petitioner.\n<\/p>\n
\t18.\tOn the contrary, in the present case, it is not a claim for damages
\nby the University but it is only an additional fee collected by them on account
\nof the unnecessary expenditure involved by continuing to maintain the
\nExamination Centre in the College.       The petitioner,  though  a  minority
\ninstitution,
\ndoes  not clothe them  with the right to mismanage.    Article 30(1) of the
\nConstitution of India protects right to  establish and administer an institution
\nof its own choice.    But this right to administer does not carry with the right
\nto maladminister.  In the conduct of a public examination, a private College has
\nno role and it is the function of the University.  In that context, the staff of
\nthe College including the Principal become agents of the University and are
\nsubjected to  act under the directives of the University.     It is wrong on the
\npart of the petitioner to invoke the protection under Article 30(1) of the
\nConstitution and to contend that the minority right has been violated.\n<\/p>\n
\t19.\tIn the light of the aforesaid provisions, if the Principal was held
\nto be either irresponsible or lacked in capacity to supervise the staff-in-
\ncharge of the conduct of University Examination, undoubtedly, the liability
\nvests on all concerned including the College Management. The Correspondent \/
\nSecretary of the College cannot plead either
\nhelplessness or lack of liability for any damage or loss caused by its own
\nservants.    The petitioner was not able to advance any proposition of law to
\ndisown their liability and making good the loss sustained due to the conduct of
\nthe staff employed by the College.    The Secretary of the College cannot feign
\nignorance over the happenings inside the College as the incident had been widely
\npublished in the news paper. The college should have taken appropriate
\ndisciplinary action against the staff concerned including the Principal if any
\nlapse on his part. But for the timely action of the University, the students
\nwould have been put  into a greater peril of writing examinations from other
\ncentres.\n<\/p>\n
\t20.Under these circumstances, this Court finds no illegality or infirmity
\nin the order passed by the University and the writ petition deserves to be
\ndismissed.    Accordingly, the same is dismissed.    Since the petitioner
\nCollege, by the interim order of this Court, paid only Rs.50,000\/-, they are
\nirected to pay the balance amount within a period of three weeks from the date
\nof receipt of a copy of this order.  However, there will be no order as to
\ncosts.   Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed.\n<\/p>\n
gri<\/p>\n
To
\nRegistrar
\nMadurai Kamaraj University
\nMadurai Palgalai Nagar
\nMadurai\t\t\t\t\t<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court J.Chelladurai vs Madurai Kamaraj University on 1 October, 2007 BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 01\/10\/2007 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P (MD) No.2330 of 2006 and W.P.M.P. (MD) Nos.2554 and 2555 of 2006 J.Chelladurai Correspondent Jeyaraj Chelladurai College Periyakulam, Theni District … Petitioner vs. Madurai Kamaraj […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-136748","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nJ.Chelladurai vs Madurai Kamaraj University on 1 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"J.Chelladurai vs Madurai Kamaraj University on 1 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2007-09-30T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2015-12-09T14:22:10+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"12 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"J.Chelladurai vs Madurai Kamaraj University on 1 October, 2007\",\"datePublished\":\"2007-09-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-09T14:22:10+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2\"},\"wordCount\":2254,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2\",\"name\":\"J.Chelladurai vs Madurai Kamaraj University on 1 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2007-09-30T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2015-12-09T14:22:10+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"J.Chelladurai vs Madurai Kamaraj University on 1 October, 2007\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"J.Chelladurai vs Madurai Kamaraj University on 1 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"J.Chelladurai vs Madurai Kamaraj University on 1 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2007-09-30T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2015-12-09T14:22:10+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"12 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"J.Chelladurai vs Madurai Kamaraj University on 1 October, 2007","datePublished":"2007-09-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-09T14:22:10+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2"},"wordCount":2254,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2","name":"J.Chelladurai vs Madurai Kamaraj University on 1 October, 2007 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2007-09-30T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2015-12-09T14:22:10+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/j-chelladurai-vs-madurai-kamaraj-university-on-1-october-2007-2#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"J.Chelladurai vs Madurai Kamaraj University on 1 October, 2007"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/136748","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=136748"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/136748\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=136748"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=136748"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=136748"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}