AUT-MUTA to organise Statewide protest seeking CAS salary benefits
He added that implementation guidelines were subsequently released by the Directorate of Collegiate Education on May 4, 2021.
While faculty members in government colleges have consistently received Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) benefits along with the corresponding pay and arrears, their counterparts in government-aided colleges continued to be excluded from such entitlements, he noted.
'Following repeated representations from the teachers, career advancement pay was briefly extended to aided college teachers in Coimbatore and Thanjavur regions. In the remaining six regions – Chennai, Tiruchi, Vellore, Dharmapuri, Madurai and Tirunelveli, only promotion orders to the post of associate professors have been issued, while the corresponding salary revisions and arrears remain unpaid,' he added.
P.K. Periasamy Raja, president, MUTA, said that the Higher Education Minister Govi Chezhiaan at a meeting with the union representatives on June 23, 2025, gave a verbal assurance that the long pending CAS salary benefits would be incorporated in the July 2025 payroll, but, as of now, no steps were taken to fulfil the assurance.
'Condemning the State government and demanding our needs, we have planned to conduct a Statewide full-day demonstration on July 28 at all eight Regional Joint Director offices of the Collegiate Education across the State,' he said.
Next to that, a mass appeal on August 8 at the Directorate of Collegiate Education will be organised.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
19 hours ago
- Business Standard
FIFA rulings are open to challenge beyond Switzerland, says EU court
The European Union's top court ruled Friday that some decisions by international governing bodies, such as FIFA and the International Olympic Committee, can be challenged outside Switzerland, opening up a system that currently binds athletes, officials and clubs to accept verdicts there. A statement from the European Court of Justice said that tribunals in the 27 EU member states must be able to carry out an in-depth review of those awards for consistency with the fundamental rules of EU law. The ECJ ruling in Luxembourg means that EU national courts should be able to review verdicts from the Swiss-based Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). Switzerland is not a member of the European Union. The awards made by the CAS must be amenable to effective judicial review," the statement said. It said that national courts or tribunals must be empowered to carry out ... an in-depth judicial review to ensure that CAS rulings "are consistent with EU public policy. CAS director general Matthieu Reeb said the court's decision limited the review of CAS rulings by EU courts to matters of EU public policy. "In service to the international sports community, CAS will continue to provide timely and expert dispute resolution worldwide, he said in a statement. There was no immediate comment from world soccer governing body FIFA and the IOC. The decision came after a decade-long legal fight by Belgian soccer club RFC Seraing and Maltese investment fund Doyen Sports, which led to the ruling Friday. They opposed FIFA rules prohibiting third-party ownership of a player's registration and transfer rights, and in 2015 asked a commercial court in Brussels to review if those rules breached EU law. The ECJ did not specifically rule on third-party ownership as such, only the scope of CAS decisions. Seraing's lawyer, Jean-Louis Dupont, said the club should be compensated after FIFA imposed sanctions including transfer bans and a fine. He added that the ruling has wide implications, challenging the legality of all forced arbitrations by mandated international sports federations. In summary, the (court) has definitively ended the procedural deception used by international sports federations to evade the proper application of EU law through the imposition of compulsory arbitration outside the EU, said Dupont, who also helped win the landmark Bosman case on the contractual freedom of players 30 years ago. The Court of Arbitration for Sport was created in 1984 to give sports a unified and binding legal forum for settling disputes and appeals based in the IOC's home city of Lausanne, Switzerland. It is the mandatory path for athletes to challenge disciplinary and appeal judgments by Olympic sports federations. It rules on cases across dozens of sports and is a key authority in doping cases. Soccer is by far the biggest client in the CAS caseload of about 950 registered each year. FIFA's contribution of 2.5 million Swiss francs ($2.75 million) to CAS in 2023 was more than 10% of the court's revenue that year. CAS verdicts can be challenged at Switzerland's supreme court in Lausanne on limited procedural grounds and are rarely overturned. Seraing and Doyen lost at the Swiss Federal Tribunal in 2018. The ECJ said any CAS decision that binds other courts or tribunals from acting are contrary to EU law. The ruling marks a new legal blow to the authority of sports bodies in Switzerland. The same European court in Luxembourg has handed down two other major rulings in the last two years under EU competition law in the Super League case and Lassana Diarra transfer dispute that challenged the authority of soccer bodies FIFA and UEFA.
News18
a day ago
- News18
FIFA, CAS Decisions Can Now Be Challenged By Tribunals Outside Switzerland, Rules EU Top Court
The European Court of Justice ruled that EU courts can review FIFA and CAS decisions, challenging Swiss-based arbitration. In a landmark ruling, the European Union's highest court determined on Friday that decisions made by FIFA, world football's governing body, can be contested in courts outside of Switzerland. Why is this monumental? Well, the decision significantly weakens the long-standing requirement that legal challenges against sports rulings must go through Swiss-based arbitration. EU Courts Can Review CAS Rulings The European Court of Justice (ECJ), based in Luxembourg, stated that courts within the 27 EU member states must have the authority to conduct a thorough review of arbitral decisions to ensure they align with European Union law. 'Tribunals in the 27 EU member states must be able to carry out an in-depth review of those awards for consistency with the fundamental rules of EU law," the ECJ said in an official statement. This ruling effectively allows national courts within the EU to review and potentially overturn decisions made by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), the Lausanne-based tribunal that handles disputes in global sports. According to the ECJ, the arbitration awards made by CAS cannot be immune to judicial scrutiny, especially where fundamental rights and public policy of the EU are concerned. 'The awards made by the CAS must be amenable to effective judicial review," the Court emphasized. It added that 'national courts or tribunals must be empowered to carry out … an in-depth judicial review" to ensure these awards conform to 'EU public policy." Neither FIFA nor CAS issued immediate responses following the ruling. A Decade-Long Legal Battle The decision stems from a case brought by Belgian football club RFC Seraing and Maltese investment firm Doyen Sports, who began their legal fight against FIFA in 2015. The dispute centered on FIFA's ban on third-party ownership (TPO) of players' economic rights—an arrangement where external investors hold a stake in a player's financial value, often influencing transfer decisions. RFC Seraing and Doyen challenged the rule in a Belgian commercial court, arguing that the prohibition on TPO violated EU competition law. However, FIFA's regulations required that any challenge to its rules be taken to CAS, where the ban was upheld. The ECJ's ruling now potentially reopens the door for such challenges within national legal systems. Impact on Switzerland-Based Sports Tribunals CAS was established in 1984 by the International Olympic Committee to serve as a centralized venue for resolving sports-related disputes. Based in Lausanne, it has traditionally held binding authority in cases involving FIFA, UEFA, and other major sporting organizations headquartered in Switzerland. However, Friday's ruling marks the latest legal blow to the dominance of Swiss sports bodies within the EU. It follows two other significant ECJ judgments that challenged FIFA and UEFA's control under EU competition law. One was the high-profile European Super League case, and the other involved French footballer Lassana Diarra, whose transfer dispute also questioned the legitimacy of FIFA regulations under EU law. (with AP inputs) News18 Sports brings you the latest updates, live commentary, and highlights from cricket, football, tennis, badmintion, wwe and more. Catch breaking news, live scores, and in-depth coverage. Also Download the News18 App to stay updated! First Published: Disclaimer: Comments reflect users' views, not News18's. Please keep discussions respectful and constructive. Abusive, defamatory, or illegal comments will be removed. News18 may disable any comment at its discretion. By posting, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
NDTV
a day ago
- NDTV
Madras High Court Bars Use Of Living Leaders' Names In Government Schemes
Chennai: The Madras High Court has directed the Tamil Nadu government that while launching and operating welfare schemes through various advertisements, the name of any living personality, photograph of any former Chief Minister/ideological leaders or party insignia/emblem/flag shall not be included. The first bench comprising Chief Justice M M Shrivatsava and Justice Sunder Mohan passed the interim order on Thursday on a petition filed by AIADMK MP and advocate Iniyan. In his petition, Shanmugam sought to restrain the state government from introducing/rebranding any scheme in the name of any living personality pending disposal of his Writ Petition. He also sought a direction to the Election Commission of India and the Committee on Content Regulation in Government Advertising to take necessary action against the DMK under Paragraph 16A of the Election Symbols (Reservation and Allotment) Order, 1968 and consequently forbear the state government from using the name "Stalin" in relation to the activities of the scheme emanating from G.O. (Ms) No. 390, Public (Mudhalvarin Mugavari) Department, dated 19.06.2025 and thus render justice. In its order, the bench made it clear that it has not passed any order against launching, implementation or operation of any welfare scheme of the government. The bench said on prima facie considerations, it finds that the prayer for the interim relief has been made on the apprehension that the state is proceeding to launch many welfare schemes on the same line as the advertisement under challenge in this petition. The bench said the Supreme court has issued successive directives from time to time regulating the content of government advertisements. In a clarificatory order passed in a review, the Supreme Court in the case of Karnataka Vs Common Cause and others permitted certain exceptions to the directive issued in the case of Common Cause Vs Union of India. As per the said order, publication of the photograph of the incumbent Chief Minister was permissible. The use of photographs of ideological leaders or former Chief Minister, prima facie, would be against the directives of the Supreme Court, the bench added. The bench said it would not be permissible to mention the name of the living political personality in the nomenclature of the government scheme. Moreover, using the name of any ruling political party, its insignia/logo/emblem/flag also appears to be prima facie against the directives of the Supreme Court and the Election Commission of India, the bench added. The bench said pendency of this petition shall not come in the way of the Election Commission of India or the authorities in initiating any proceeding on the basis of the complaint made by the petitioner. The bench posted to August 13, further hearing of the case.
