Out of his "love" for the University of Hong Kong, Occupy Central co-founder Benny Tai Yiu-ting has made up his mind not to haul his employer to court for acting on "ulterior political motives" to punish him over donations. Tai, an associate law professor, faces a three-year ban imposed by HKU's governing council, forbidding him from hiring researchers, receiving donations and assuming managerial posts. The triple penalties, which Tai first received word of more than a month ago, were "illegal, irrational and procedurally improper", according to a strongly worded letter he wrote to council chairman Leong Che-hung. Those decisions were to "punish" him for initiating the Occupy pro-democracy movement last year that resulted in 79 days of mass sit-ins, he said. "I write not as an application for review by the council … I have reasonable suspicion that the council has been politically infiltrated," Tai wrote in the letter, which he passed to the South China Morning Post . "I believe any request to review its own politically tainted decisions will not receive any impartial and fair treatment by the council." Tai is one of four scholars accused of impropriety over the handling of HK$1.45 million in donations in 2012 and 2013. All four have responded to the decisions of the council, which is to meet on Tuesday, on each of them. The donations drew attention after Tai's emails were hacked last year. Beijing-loyalist media published reports attacking him, highlighting some of the cash backed Occupy-linked activities, including a mock referendum. READ MORE: Benny Tai banned from supervising university researchers for three years A subsequent HKU inquiry did not find issues with the use of funds for Occupy, but claimed the scholars had not followed procedures in accepting and using the money. But while it concluded Tai had failed to meet "expected standards" in withholding an anonymous donor's identity, he said the requirement was never made known. "I am a teacher and expert in the administrative law of Hong Kong … [The council's decisions] would definitely be invalidated by the court," Tai continued in the letter. "However, out of my love for the University of Hong Kong, I am not prepared to apply for a judicial review." HKU had been "deeply hurt" by some council members and a legal challenge "will inflict more harm to the university and this is the last thing I want to see in my life", he added. Another of the scholars, Dr Robert Chung Ting-yiu - director of the HKU public opinion programme who conducted the "referendum" - wrote in his response that he could accept the penalty of being barred from receiving donations only if it was meant to help HKU move forward, but "not for the reason" that he had committed any mistake. Tai's former boss Professor Johannes Chan Man-mun, whose candidacy for a key managerial post was voted down by council members last month, asked the council to reverse its ruling that he had committed a managerial oversight. The fourth scholar, music professor Daniel Chua, said that asking the council to review itself was not in HKU's best interests. Meanwhile HKU's student union on Monday began a referendum of students asking whether the controversial Professor Arthur Li Kwok-cheung, tipped as the next council chairman, was suitable for a governing role. Some 12.2 per cent of the 16,000 eligible voters took part on the first day of the five-day vote.