8.The petitioner admittedly posted the subject message in a WhatsApp group. WhatsApp is essentially a communication platform. It is end-to-end encrypted. Messages can be sent by one to another. In the alternative, there can also be a group of persons among whom the messages can be privately shared. Someone who is not a part of the group cannot have access to the conversation exchanged among the WhatsApp group members. 9.The petitioner started a WhatsApp group known as “AIRBEATN and Puduvai”. According to him, it is a private group that exists to organize their union activities and to communicate among them. The issue is whether the aforesaid circular can be deployed to regulate the activities on the said platform. If the circular is applied literally and verbatim, the act of the petitioner does amount to misconduct. Even though the circular has not been formally impugned, I will adopt the approach approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bharathidasan University Vs. AICTE (2001) 8 SCC 676. The following ratio was laid down therein:“When the power to make regulations is confined to certain limits and made to flow in a well-defined canal within stipulated banks, those actually made or shown and found to be not made within its confines but outside them, the Courts are bound to ignore them when the question of their 6/16