S.P. DEEPAK Vs. CHANCELLOR UNIVERSITY OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appeals being connected, they are disposed of by a common judgment. The appellant in both the cases is the writ petitioner in the two writ petitions from which these appeals arise.

(2.) Writ Appeal No.1832 of 2013 is filed against Writ Petition No. 28829 of 2012 whereas Writ Appeal No.1849 of 2013 is filed against judgment in Writ Petition No.13928 of 2013.

(3.) The appellant was nominated as a member of the Senate of the respondent University (Kerala University) vide Ext.P1 notification dated 20.12.2010. He was to hold the office until the next reconstitution of the Senate. The term of the Senate is four years. The Kerala University Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act')was amended by ordinance 58/2011. The 4th proviso was added to section 18(3). The nominated members were to hold their office subject to Doctrine of Pleasure, that ie., they were to hold their office during the pleasure of the person who nominated them. In the case of the appellant, he was nominated by the Chancellor. Writ Petition No.28829 of 2012 is filed initially on the basis of issuance of Ext.P4 and Ext.P5. By Ext.P4 dated 26.11.2012, which is seen issued by the Secretary to Governor, the nomination of the appellant is withdrawn in exercise of power under the 4th proviso to section 18(3). By Ext.P5 notification referring to the order of the Chancellor to withdraw the nomination, it is notified that he has ceased to be a member of the senate of the University with immediate effect. Originally when the appellant approached this court the following prayers were sought :