Court No. - 29 Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 992 of 2010 Petitioner :- C/M Shri Ram Dev Sanskrit Maha. And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. Thru Sec. Finance Lko. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- R.C. Tiwari,P.S. Baghel Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,R.M. Vishwakarma,V.B. Mishra Hon'ble Arun Tandon,J.
Hon’ble Rajesh Chandra,J.
This is petitioner’s Special Appeal directed against judgment and
order of the Hon’ble Single Justice dated 22.05.2010 passed in
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 25966 of 2010. The writ petition was
directed against an order of the Vice Chancellor of the
Sampurnanand Sanskrit Vishwavidyalaya, Varanasi dated
23.04.2010 whereunder the Vice Chancellor recognised the
Committee of Management headed by Ram Chandra Pandey as
the lawful Committee of Management of the institution namely,
Shri Ram Dev Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Bareri, District Jaunpur in
exercise of powers under Section 2(13) of the State Universities
Act.
The Hon’ble Single Judge disposed of the writ petition at the
admission stage by providing that the petitioner may file a
representation before the Vice Chancellor at the first instance in
respect of his being the lawful Manager of the institution. The
Vice Chancellor in turn was directed to decide the same after
affording opportunity of hearing to the parties including
respondent no. 7, within 8 weeks of the filing of the
representation. The writ Court further provided that the order of
the Vice Chancellor impugned in the writ petition shall abide by
the orders to be passed by the Vice Chancellor of the University.
The present Special Appeal has been filed on the allegation that
since the order impugned in the writ petition had been passed in
violation of principles of natural justice, the writ Court should
have quashed the same and should have then directed
reconsideration of the matter.
We have heard Shri P.S. Baghel, Senior Advocate assisted by
Shri R.C.Tewari, Advocate on behalf of the petitioner and Shri
R.K.Ojha, Advocate on behalf of respondent no. 7.
In the facts and circumstances of the case we are of the
considered opinion that the order of the Hon’ble Single Judge
requiring the Vice Chancellor to reconsider the matter on a
representation being made by the petitioner cannot be faulted
with. The Hon’ble Single Judge has taken care to provide that the
order impugned shall abide by the orders to be passed by the
Vice Chancellor on the representation to be made by the
petitioner. There is no such legal error in the order of the Hon’ble
Single Judge which may warrant any interference by the Division
Bench in exercise of powers under Chapter VIII Rule 5 of the
Allahabad High Court’s Rule.
However in the facts and circumstances of the case it is provided
that on the representation being filed by the petitioner as directed
by the writ Court, the Vice Chancellor of the University shall take
appropriate decision within a period of three weeks from the date
the same is filed before him.
The order of the Hon’ble Single Judge is modified to that extent
only.
This Special Appeal is disposed of.
Dated : 21.06.10
VR/Spl. Appl. 992/10