(1.) . The dispute relates to the Delhi Institute of Technology, an autonomous Institution receiving full grant-in-aid from the Government of Delhi and Dr. B.N. Mishra," who, till the time of his attaining the age of superannuation on May 31, 1996, was its Director. Dr. Mishra, infact, appears to be associated with the Institute right from its very inception in the year 1983. -Earlier he was its Principal. Much before his attaining the age of superannuation he applied for his re-employment. To be precise that application, addressed to the President of the Institute, was of February 12, 1996. His grievance is. that he was not even considered for re-employment and that consequently the order of the Board of Governors dated May 16, 1996 directing one Prof. Raj Senani to look after the duties of the Director with effect from June 1, 1996 in addition to his normal duties is "absolutely illegal, arbitrary" and passed with "malafide intention, ulterior motives and in violation of the Memorandum of Association, Rules and Regulations as well as Service Rules of the Society as applicable to the Institute". He has thus filed this petition seeking a Writ of Mandamus or direction quashing the said Memorandum and for direction to the respondents to take decision for his re- employment/contractual appointment.
(2.) . Before I proceed further it may be noticed that the Institute was registered under the Societies Registration Act on July 12, 1987, that it has its Mem- orandum of Association and Rules and Regulations and so also Service Rules. It also needs to be noticed that the Institute is affliated with the University of Delhi within the meaning of Clause (a) of Section 2 of the Delhi University Act, 1922.
(3.) . I think it also needs to be mentioned at this stage that the respondents have contested the writ petition and that, briefly stated, as per them the decision not to re-employ or offer contractual employment to the petitioner was perfectly legal and not tainted with malafides.