Dr.M.Ponnuswamy, ProfessorDepartment of Tamil Language,University of Madras,Marina Campus,Chennai - 600 005 v. University of Madras

3.The brief facts necessary for disposal of the writpetition are that by resolution No.89 dated 8.6.2007, the Syndicateof the respondent University resolved that the Vice-Chancellor beauthorised to transfer the faculty members from one department toanother department, including Institute of Distance Education inthe same discipline/School/Centre as and when required and the samebe reported to the Syndicate.4.The apprehension of the petitioner is that the Professorin one department of School in the University can be transferred toanother department in the same School or Centre of the Universityand he will be forced to teach a subject in which he has nospecialised knowledge and by virtue of the said resolution, iftransfers are effected it will lead to dilution of standards in theUniversity. According to the petitioner, in the University ofMadras, there are 17 schools, comprising of 66 departments, locatedin four campuses. Each department has separate Board of Studies,which will be headed by a Head of the Department and other membersof the Board of Studies, drawn from various other universities allover India. It is stated in the affidavit that in the year 1991,the University had clubbed all the departments for the purpose ofapplication of roaster system for appointment in teaching post inthe University and the said action was challenged before this Courtin W.P.No.10610 of 1991 and the said writ petition was allowed byorder dated 18.9.1991 following the Judgment of the Supreme Courtreported in AIR 1988 SC 959 (Dr.Chakradhar Paswan v. State ofBihar) holding that the cadre strength of each department has to beseparately assessed and clubbing various posts in all thedepartments and reserving posts on the basis of roaster will leadto 100% reservation, if there is only one post in a department.The said judgment of the single Judge was confirmed in W.A.No.1296of 1991 by order dated 24.10.1991. The SLP filed against the saidjudgment before the Supreme Court was also dismissed on 16.4.1992.Due to the said judgment, the Government issued orders in letterNo.(2D)No.58, dated 19.4.2002, to treat each departmentindependently for the purpose of appointment. Citing the saidorder and the judgments, the petitioner states that transferringfaculty members from one department to another department iscontrary to the said decision. Focussing the said two contentionsthis writ petition is filed.5.Respondent filed counter affidavit contending as follows:(a)The University of Madras is introducing quite a number ofinter- disciplinary courses in various branches of studies and itmay not be in a position to appoint required number of facultypersons for all these inter-disciplinary courses. The Universityalso has started Centres of Excellence viz., Population studies,Ocean studies, Disaster Management Studies, Environmental Studies,etc., and the curriculum of various branches of studies are https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ expanding and the University has to cope up with the growing needsof dissemination of knowledge to the student community.(b)To achieve the same, teaching manpower has to beinevitably transferred from one department to another to handleinter-disciplinary and cross-disciplinary nature of studies ofvarious branches in the department of University and for thatpurpose the University decided to post teaching faculties from onedepartment to another.(c)It is also stated in the counter affidavit that in theappointment order issued to the faculty members, it is stated thatthey are liable to be transferred including to the Institute ofDistance Education as a general condition and the impugnedresolution was passed to avoid financial commitment on the part ofthe University by appointing fresh candidates.(d)For the contention that by effecting transfers from onedepartment to another, there will be dilution of standards, it issubmitted that there are many inter disciplinary programs such asBio-Chemistry, Bio-Physics, Bio-Informatics, Corporate Sociology,Actuarial Sciences and Hospital Management and to cope up thedemands for teaching these faculties, a situation has arisen totransfer the faculty from one department to another to handle interdisciplinary nature of subjects related to them.(e)It is further stated that the Syndicate, as early as inMarch, 1988, had approved the transfer of teaching faculties inapproving norms evolved by the T&RD Committee for interdepartmental transfers. A Sociology teacher or a Psychologyteacher or an Economics teacher is as much required in offering amaster degree program in management as those of management experts.Similarly, a Mathematics Teacher is required not only in ComputerScience and Statistics but also Physics and it is impossible forthe University to appoint as many teacher as much of interdisciplinary courses are introduced.(f)An assurance is given in the counter affidavit that whiletransferring faculty members, 'the University would carefullyexamine the issues of transfer with regard to subject curriculum,compatibility in consultation with the competent faculty members inthe respective areas of studies. The University would also evolvecertain strategies to see that the transferees are not put to anydisadvantages.'(g)A chart is filed along with the counter affidavit to showthat in some of the traditional courses the students' demand is onthe decline and in the department of Adult and Continuing Educationthe strength of students in 2007-2008 is one, however, there is oneProfessor, two Readers and two Lecturers are working. Similarly in https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the department of Pathology, no student is admitted for the year2007-2008, however there are two Professors and one Lecturer arestill working in that department. Similar is the strength in otherdepartments. (h)Recently, during pendency of the writ petition, theSenate of the University in its meeting held on 27.10.2007 hasapproved the amendment to statute 25 of Chapter IX of UniversityCalendar Vol.1, 2001, which reads as follows:"In a University Department in which if thereare Professors then the Senior Most Professor shallbe the Head of the Department and all otherProfessors, Readers and Lecturers, if any, shallwork under the direction of the Professor and Headof the Department concerned with the subject, andshall assist him in the performance of his duties asdefined in law 22, 23 and 24 of this Chapter.In a Department in which there is no Professor,but only Readers then the senior most Reader, shallbe the Head-in-charge of the Department, and allother Readers and Lecturers, if any, shall assisthim and work under his direction.In a Department in which there is no Professoror Reader, but only Lecturers then the senior mostLecturers shall be the Head-in-charge of theDepartment, and all other Lecturers, if any, shallassist him and work under his direction.Provided however, that the above provision willnot in any manner retract the power of the Syndicateto place and faculty member of the University in therank of professor of relevant School/Chairperson ofthe School as Head-in-charge of the Department, ifany urgent situation warrants."For the said amendment, the Governor of Tamil Nadu gave his assenton 20.12.2007 and the same is also enforced. Pointing out thesefactual aspects and the impracticability in retaining facultymembers in excess in some departments, the respondent seeksdismissal of the writ petition.6.The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitionerreiterated the contention raised in the affidavit by stating thateach department should be treated separately as held by this Courtin the earlier writ petition for fixing the cadre strength andtherefore transfer of faculty members from one department toanother department will upset the cadre strength and also dilute https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ the standard of teaching and hence the impugned resolution is to beset aside. Learned Senior Counsel further submitted that theamendment to Statute 25 of Chapter IX of the University CalendarVol.1, 2001, is made only with regard to the post of head in-chargeof the department on urgent situations and the said amendmentnowhere permits the University to transfer the faculty membersviz., Professors, Readers and Lecturers.7.The learned Additional Advocate General appearing for therespondent University on the other hand submitted that the decisionrelied on by the petitioner is relating to the appointment offaculty members in each department and when a single post isavailable in a department, there cannot be any reservation of thatpost and the same was found illegal in view of the judgment of theSupreme Court reported in AIR 1988 SC 959 (Dr.Chakradhar Paswan v.State of Bihar) and the said decision has nothing to do with thetransfer of faculty members from one department to anotherdepartment to handle classes of inter-disciplinary subjects. Thelearned Additional Advocate General further submitted that nofaculty member will be transferred to other faculty, which has norelevant subject and a scheme will be evolved in consultation withthe competent faculty members in the respective areas of studiesand a strategy will be adopted and no faculty member will be put toany disadvantage. It is also pointed out by the learned AdditionalAdvocate General that as per the Annexure filed in the typed set ofpapers, there are 65 departments and in some departments there aremore number of students, however there is less number of facultymembers and in some departments either there is no students or veryfew students, however, the faculty members are on the higher side.Therefore, the University resolved to re-deploy the excess facultymembers to needy departments, that too only in the inter-disciplinary departments. Hence there will be no dilution ofstandards in the departments and the interest of the teaching staffwill be taken care of. The Additional Advocate General alsosubmitted that in the appointment orders given to every facultymembers, it is clearly stated that they are liable to betransferred including to the Institute of Distance Education andtherefore no further amendment in the statute to transfer theProfessors, Readers and Lecturers is warranted.8.I have considered the rival submissions of the learnedSenior Counsel for the petitioner as well as the AdditionalAdvocate General appearing for the respondent University.9.The point in issue is as to whether a faculty member fromone department can be transferred to another department as per theimpugned resolution and whether the said action will affect therights of the faculty members and will dilute the standards ofeducation. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

10.The appointment order given to the petitioner on11.6.1985, Clause 7 states that the petitioner is liable to betransferred to any of the University Post Graduate Centres at anytime, and in Clause 10, it is stated that the petitioner has toperform such other duties as may be assigned to him by the Head ofthe Department and authorities of the University, from time totime. When the petitioner was promoted as Reader in the Departmentof Tamil language under the Career Development Scheme by orderdated 25.2.1999, he was informed in Clause 8 that he is liable tobe transferred to any of the University Departments/P.G. Centres atany time and under Clause 10 he was directed to perform such otherduties as may be assigned by the authorities of the University fromtime to time. Some other appointment orders were also producedbefore me issued on 29.3.1985, 6.10.1994, 3.6.2005 and thepromotion order given on 25.2.1999.11.From the perusal of the above appointment orders andpromotion orders it could be seen that there is a clause empoweringthe University to effect transfers from one department to anotherby the Head of the Department or the authorities of the Universityand the petitioner has accepted the said terms and conditions ofthe appointment as well as the order of promotion. Hence thepetitioner is not entitled to challenge the impugned resolutionauthorising transfer from one department to another department onadministrative exigencies. The Annexure filed in the typed set ofpapers contain the name of departments, student strength in 2006-2007, 2007-2008 and also the staff strength which reads as follows:Sl.NoName of the Department2006-072007-08Staff StrengthP RL1Ancient History andArcchaeology 12301 -2 2Indian History38351 -2 3Anthropology1052 -34Criminology76201 -3 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl.NoName of the Department2006-072007-08Staff StrengthP RL5Psychology65352 116Education26231 -17Adult and ContinuingEducation211 228Sociology67331 -39Defence and StrategicStudies2461 1210Anna Centre for PublicAffairs2772 1-11Politics and PublicAdministration26321 1212Economics39353 1-13Econometrics1993 -214Mass Media andCommunication Studies7252- -415Philosophy733 -2 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl.NoName of the Department2006-072007-08Staff StrengthP RL16Saiva Siddhanta--1 --17Vaishnavism35102 --18Christian Studies33181 -119Jainology54- --20JBAS Centre for IslamicStudies11- -121Indian Music74271 -122English 68501 -523French19221 -124Hindi13131 -225Kannada391 -126Malayalam14251 11 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl.NoName of the Department2006-072007-08Staff StrengthP RL27Tamil Literature54271 -328Tamil Language47342 -229Telugu3471 -230Arabic, Persian and Urdu38222 -131Sanskrit15174 -232Commerce98451 -333Information Science1892 1134RIAS in Mathematics58597 1135Statistics5727- --36Computer Science31151 -437Geography23201 13 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl.NoName of the Department2006-072007-08Staff StrengthP RL38Management Studies175922 2139Dr.Ambedkar Centre forEconomics Studies361 --40Legal Studies1611 -241Centre for South &Southeast Asian Studies181 -242Geology20183 -243Applied Geology26213 -444Analytical Chemistry20163 1-45Inorganic Chemistry25212 -346Organic Chemistry23202 -347Physical Chemistry21122 -148Polymer Science219- 12 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl.NoName of the Department2006-072007-08Staff StrengthP RL49Crystallography andBiophysics35195 1-50Theoretical Physics &Nuclear Physics2581 2251Nuclear Physics3192 -452Biochemistry100612 1353Biotechnology57251 1354CAS in Botany92557 -855Zoology31204 1156Central InstrumentationResearch & Science52- -257Medical Biochemistry41213 -258Genetics66283 2259Microbiology1093 -2 https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ Sl.NoName of the Department2006-072007-08Staff StrengthP RL60Endocrinology32123 -261Pharmacology andEnvironmental Toxicology1063 -362Anatomy2113- -363Pathology--2 -164Physiology45- -265National Centre forUltrafast Processes810- -1 12.From the perusal of the above Annexure, it is evidentthat in the department of Saiva Siddhanta, there was no student toundergo PG course for the year 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 and oneProfessor is working in the department without any work.Similarly, in the department of Pathology, no student is admittedfor the years 2006-2007 and 2007-2008, however, there are twoprofessors and one Lecturer working in the said department withoutany work. On the other hand, in the department of Bio-Chemistry,there were 100 students admitted in the year 2006-2007 and 61students for the year 2007-2008, for which only two Professors andone Reader and three Lecturer posts are available, which may not besufficient to handle the said number of students. Similarly inManagement Studies, number of students admitted for 2006-2007 was175 and for 2007-2008 92, for which only two Professors, twoReaders and one Lecturer posts are available. In the department ofEnglish, the number of students admitted for 2006-2007 was 68 andin 2007-2008 it is 50, for which one Professor and 5 Lecturers areavailable.13.The above facts and figures clearly strengthen thearguments of the learned Additional Advocate General that in many https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ departments, even though there are no students or very limitednumber of students, there is excess staff and even though number ofstudents are on the higher in some departments, the faculty membersavailable are less. The University cannot dispense with theservices of any of the faculty member on the ground of want ofstudents and inter disciplinary courses having been introduced inthe University, the faculty members can be transferred to otherdepartments, which have relation to their discipline/ faculty.There can be no hardship faced by the faculty members due to thesaid transfer as there is an assurance given in the counteraffidavit that the University would carefully examine the issue oftransfer with regard to the subject curriculum, compatibility, inconsultation with the competent faculty members in the respectiveareas of studies. It is further stated that the University wouldalso evolve certain strategies to see that the transferees are notput to any disadvantage. The impugned resolution also states thatthe faculty members may be transferred from one department toanother in the same discipline/School /Centre.14.The decision relied on by the learned Senior Counsel forthe petitioner reported in AIR 1988 SC 959 (Dr.Chakradhar Paswan v.State of Bihar) is only with regard to reservation of single post,which is impermissible and the University is not reserving any postby virtue of this transfer and it is only adjusting the excessteaching faculty by re-deploying them, that too in the relevant orinter-discipline/School/Centre.15.By the impugned resolution, the conditions of service ofthe petitioner is not at all affected. There is no reduction instatus, emoluments and also in the number of working hours. If theimpugned order is not upheld, the respondent University will beforced to retain the petitioner in the very same department even ifthere is no workload to petitioner in the Department. TheUniversity Grants Commission guidelines also prescribe certainnumber of working hours to the Head of the Department, Professors,Readers and Lecturers, which goes to show that if there is lessernumber of working hours in a department for a Professor, Reader,Lecturer, he may be allotted work in other Departments, whererelevant subjects are to be handled, provided they are inter-disciplinary. Since the appointment/promotion order contain aclause to transfer the petitioner and teaching faculty members toany other Department, no amendment is required in the Statute 25,Chapter IX of the University Calendar, Vol.I, as the appointmentorder itself confers power to effect transfer and it is an incidentof service. 16.The petitioner having accepted the order of appointmentand promotion, accepting the conditions that he is liable fortransfer to any department by the authorities of the University, nocase is made out to quash the impugned resolution. https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ There is no merit in the writ petition and the same isdismissed. No costs. Connected miscellaneous petition is alsodismissed. Sd/-Asst. Registrar./true copy/Sub Asst. Registrar.vrToThe Registrar, University of Madras,Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005.+ one cc to Mr. Kandavadivel Duraisamy, Advocate, SR.9240BVR(CO)Rp 03.03.08 W.P.No.22171 of 2007 & connected MP.