IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
W.P.(S) No.6640 of 2007
Uday Prasad Singh. .......... Petitioner.
-Versus-
Sidho Kanhu Murmu University & Ors. .......... Respondents.
------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA NATH TIWARI
------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate.
For the University : Mr. S. Piparwall, Advocate.
For Respondent no.5 : Mr. A. K. Sinha, Sr. Advocate.
------
12/03.07.2009
: In this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for quashing
Letter no.MGC 24/2007 dated 3rd December, 2007, whereby the
decision taken by the Governing Body of the College dated 2nd
December, 2007 has been communicated to the petitioner,
allowing the Respondent no.5 to continue as Professor-in-Charge
of the College.
The grievance of the petitioner is that earlier he was made
Professor-in-Chage of the College, but suddenly by the said
letter it has been communicated that the Respondent no.5 has
been made Professor-in-Charge.
The petitioner has assailed the decision of the Governing
Body on two grounds; (i) that it was not a duly constituted
Governing Body and (ii) that the required members did not take
part in the meeting of the Governing Body and the quorum was
not complete. It has been submitted that against the impugned
letter, the petitioner has filed a representation before Sidho
Kanhu Murmu University on 13th December, 2007, but the same
has not been taken note of and no order has been passed till
date. The petitioner has, thus, filed this writ petition.
Respondent no.5 as also the University have appeared
and contested the claim, disputing the said factual contentions
made by the petitioner that the Managing Committee was not
duly constituted and that the quorum was not complete. It has
been submitted that the Managing Committee was constituted
in accordance with the provisions of statute and the four
members took part in the meeting of the Governing Body and
the quorum was complete and the decision is in accordance
with law.
-2-
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and in view
of the tangled factual dispute between the parties, this Court
refrains from going into the merit of rival contentions of the
parties in exercise of its writ jurisdiction. However, the University
before whom the petitioner’s representation is pending since
long is directed to consider the same and pass a reasoned order
after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner,
Respondent no.5 and any other interested party. For that
purpose the University shall be at liberty to requisition further
details/records from the concerned parties. The University shall
take decision within a period of three months from the date of
receipt/production of a copy of this order.
This writ petition is, accordingly, disposed of.
(Narendra Nath Tiwari, J.)
Sanjay/