The clarification given by the Under Secretary of the Higher Education Department on the revocation of the suspension order against the Registrar is ‘half truth’, ‘null and void’ and creates stalemate in the University which ‘paves the way to escape’ from an allegedly guilty person’, says former MP
The clarification given by the Under Secretary of the Higher Education Department on the revocation of the suspension order against the Registrar is ‘half truth’, ‘null and void’ and creates stalemate in the University which ‘paves the way to escape’ from an allegedly guilty person’, says former MP
Former MP M. Ramadoss on Tuesday said the government order revoking the suspension of the Puducherry Technological University registrar by the Vice-Chancellor on the instructions of Lieutenant Governor Tamilisai Sundararajan lacked legal validity.
In a statement, Mr. Ramdas said that the clarification given by the Under Secretary of the Higher Education Department on the revocation of the suspension order against the Registrar of PTU issued by the Vice Chancellor is a ‘half truth’, ‘null and void’ and makes the University a The impasse which paves the way for ‘the escape of the alleged guilty person’.
According to the former MP, there is no dispute that the Chancellor has the power to suspend the officer (registrar) of the PTU under Section 3 Sub Section 3 of the First Act of the PTU. However, considering that the Chancellor alone has the power to suspend the Registrar, he has to quash the action of the Vice-Chancellor by following a special procedure which is prescribed in section 12(4) of the Act.
Under this provision, the Lieutenant Governor may, by order in writing, quash any proceeding of the University which is not in conformity with the provisions of the Act, the statutes, the Ordinances and the rules made thereunder. Provided that before passing such order, he shall give a notice asking the University to show cause as to why such order should not be made.”
In this case, the Chancellor did not comply with this provision and authorized the Under Secretary to the Government to issue an order merely stating that the order suspending the Registrar stands set aside with immediate effect, Mr. Ramdas said.
It is clear that this one line order is not in accordance with the above provision of the Act and will only serve to save an officer facing charges from a proper inquiry. Actually, the Under Secretary has not even mentioned this provision in his letter. No reason has been given for the cancellation of the suspension order; No notice has been issued to the University; He said that no explanation has been sought from the university before issuing the cancellation order.
When there is no communication as required by the Act in writing between the Chancellor and the Vice-Chancellor in this regard, he wondered how such an order contravening section 12(4) of the Act could enjoy validity.
It is also important to note that Section 12(4) of the PTU Act, which details the various roles of the Chancellor, does not confer on the Chancellor the power to suspend or dismiss any employee, including the Registrar. “It is mysterious that what is not given by the Act is given by the statutes which are subordinate only to the Act”, he said.