Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

SURESH CHANDRA PANDEY versus THE STATE OF U.P. THRU' THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND OTHERS

High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


Suresh Chandra Pandey v. The State Of U.P. Thru' The Principal Secretary And Others - WRIT - A No. - 58860 of 2007 [2007] RD-AH 18472 (29 November 2007)

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Joint Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

Court No.34

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.58860 of 2007

Suresh Chandra Pandey v. The State of U.P. and others

Hon'ble R.K.Agrawal, J.

Hon'ble S.P.Mehrotra, J.

(Delivered by R.K.Agrawal, J.)

By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner, Suresh Chandra Pandey, seeks the following reliefs:-

(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite parties, particularly the opposite party nos.2, 3, 4, 6, 7 and 8, to treat the petitioner as validly appointed Principal in the institution ''Mahamana Sanskrit Maha Vidyalaya, Bhatparrani, Deoria' by not interfering in the functioning of the petitioner as Principal of ''Mahamana Sanskrit Maha Vidyalaya, Bhatparrani, Deoria' and to pay the emoluments and other benefits available to him in accordance with law;

(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the opposite parties to treat the petitioner functioning on the post of the Principal in the institution continuously without any break and fix the salary accordingly the same and accord other benefits from which the petitioner has been deprived on misconception of law and fact;

(iii) issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case; &

(iv) award cost of the petition to the petitioner throughout.

Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows:-

There is an institution, named as Mahamana Sanskrit Maha Vidyalaya, Bhatparrani, Deoria, (hereinafter referred to as "the institution") which is a recognised and aided institution. It is affiliated to Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi (hereinafter referred to as "the University") and imparts education from Prathma (class VI) to Acharya (post-graduate) level. The provisions of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 and the First Statute of the University are fully applicable to the institution. One Sri Shyam Deo Tripathi who was working as a Principal of the institution, retired on 30.6.1985 after attaining the age of superannuation. A substantive vacancy on the post of the Principal occurred on 1.7.1985. The Committee of Management of the institution proceeded to fill up the said vacancy by making an advertisement on 24.9.1990. Pursuant to the advertisement, interview was taken in which the petitioner and one Sri Swaminath Misra alongwith other candidates appeared before the selection committee. There was a difference of opinion amongst the members of the selection committee whereupon a fresh advertisement was made. The petitioner alongwith other candidates appeared on 13.9.1992 before the selection committee in which the petitioner was selected. The Vice Chancellor of the University, vide order dated 18.9.1992, granted approval to the selection of the petitioner on the post of the Principal of the institution, on which post he joined on 19.9.1992. Sri Swaminath Misra challenged the selection of the petitioner before this Court by means of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.38219 of 1992 in which the present petitioner was also arrayed as the respondent no.6. This Court, vide judgment and order dated 21.9.1995, had allowed the petition filed by Sri Swaminath Misra and had quashed the selection and approval of the present petitioner. This Court held that the selection and appointment on the post of a Principal of an affiliated college of the Universities mentioned in the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 could only be done in accordance with the provisions of the U.P.Higher Education Services Commission Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The University filed Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Apex Court, which was dismissed vide order dated 27.3.1996. The present petitioner also filed a Petition for Special Leave to Appeal being Special Leave Petition (C) No.231 of 1996, which was also dismissed by the Apex Court, vide order dated 30.8.1996.

It appears that another writ petition being Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 18229 of 1999 was filed by Sanskrit Shikshit Evam Gair Sanskrit Shikshit Berojgar Samiti, Deoria and another in which Sri Swaminath Misra was also arrayed as one of the respondents. The aforesaid writ petition was decided vide judgment and order dated 1.5.2006 in which this Court categorically held that the appointment of teachers in the colleges affiliated to the University could be made only in accordance with the provisions of the Act, as had been held in the case of Sri Swaminath Misra (supra). However, the Court directed the Principal Secretary, Higher Education, Lucknow, respondent no.22 therein, to consider the representation of the said petitioners in accordance with law as factual controversy was involved therein.

We have heard Sri M.D.Singh Shekher, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri A.K.Singh, Advocate, appearing for the petitioner, and the learned Standing Counsel.

The judgment and order passed by this Court in the case of Sri Swaminath Misra has become final between the parties. The provisions of the Act have been held to be applicable in respect of the selection and appointment of the teachers and the Principals in the degree colleges affiliated to the University. The present petitioner wants to take the benefit of order dated 12.9.2007 passed by the State Government wherein it has been stated that the selection of the teachers and the Principals of the degree colleges affiliated to the University is being done under the Statute of the University. The selection of the petitioner had been quashed by this Court as far back as in the year 1995 while rendering the judgment in the case of Sri Swaminath Misra against which the Special Leave Petition filed by the present petitioner had also been dismissed. The selection having been quashed, which position has been maintained by the Apex Court, we see no reason to entertain the present petition and grant the relief as prayed for merely on the basis of the order dated 12.9.2007 passed by the State Government.

We may mention here that the order dated 12.9.2007 is in the teeth of the judgment dated 1.5.2006 delivered by this Court in the case of Sri Swaminath Misra as also in the case of Sanskrit Shikshit Evam Gair Sanskrit Shikshit Berojgar Samiti, Deoria in which this Court has specifically held that the appointment of the teachers and the Principals in the degree colleges affiliated to the University can only be made only in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

Sri M.D.Singh Shekher, learned senior counsel, submitted that the decision rendered in the case of Sri Swaminath Misra as also in the case of Sanskrit Shikshit Evam Gair Sanskrit Shikshit Berojgar Samiti, Deoria requires reconsideration as the provisions of the Act are not attracted. We cannot reopen an issue which has become final between the parties more than a decade ago.

The writ petition is wholly misconceived and is dismissed in limine.

29.11.2007

vkp


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.