HC: No mandamus for enforcing private duty

The Hyderabad High Court has made it clear that a mandamus would lie under Article 226 of the Constitution only when there was violation of public duty, and not on private duty

Justice A. Rajasheker Reddy gave the order while dismissing a petition by Dr Syed Iqbal Ahmed, a retired professor of Muffakham Jah College of Engineering and Technology that is run by the Sultan-UlUloom Educational Society. Dr Ahmed had challenged the withholding of his salary for February, March and April by the society as also terminal benefits at the behest of a third party — the Banjara Hills branch of State Bank of Hyderabad.

Dr Ahmed told the court that his salary was withheld based on a letter from the bank that he had defaulted on his credit facility and loans. He said the society cannot act as an agent of the bank and succumb to its dictates and credit his salary and terminal benefits to the bank though he has given an alternative bank account.

The society contended that the college was a private minority unaided educational institution. The society raises funds for salaries and other expenditure and its activities are not public duties.

Justice Rajasheker Reddy noted that no material was brought on record to demonstrate that the society was receiving aid from Osmania University.

The judge agreed with the contention of the society that disputes over the deposit of arrears of the salary of Dr Ahmed into the account maintained by the society or to the account suggested by him is not a public function.

It has no ramifications on his fundamental rights to invoke the jurisdiction of the court under Article 226 of the Constitution, the judge ruled, and declared the petition non-maintainable.