YASHODA RAJ KUMARI KUNJIL Vs. STATE OF UP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Management had preferred this petition to challenge the appointment of respondent No. 7 as Principal of the institution by transfer. At the relevant time, there was no Committee of Management and a Prabandh Sanchalak had been appointed. The appointment of Prabandh Sanchalak has been upheld by a learned Single Judge and the same was affirmed by a learned Division Bench. When the matter came up for hearing, the learned Judge by his order dated May 23, 2002 noted the judgment of another learned Single Judge in the case of Narendra Kumar v. State of U.P. and Ors., 2002 46 AllLR 301 , which had taken the view that under Chapter III of the Regulations framed under the U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921, it is provided that the post of Principal in a institution can also be filled by transfer from another college, where the person sought to be transferred was appointed after selection by the Board, but such transfer is permissible only with the consent of the Management of both the institutions.

(2.) In view of that, a reference has been made to a Division Bench of this Court.

(3.) At the hearing of these petitions, various counsels have submitted their submissions in support of the view taken by the reference Judge. It has been argued that the sole purpose of appointing a Prabandh Sanchalak is to get the election held and to let a duly constituted Committee of Management to be in power. The Prabandh Sanchalak, appointed under the Scheme of Administration cannot be a substitute of the Committee of Management and the sole object of such appointment, is to get the election held within a time bound framed and to have a duly elected Committee of Management to come in power. It is, therefore, submitted that if it is held that the Prabandh Sanchalak is having all powers of the Committee of Management, this would be in violation of Articles 14 and 19 of the Constitution of India. Reliance for that purpose is placed on a judgment, in the case of Smt. Damyanti Naranga v. The Union of India and Ors., 1971 1 SCC 678. At the outset, we may mention that the vires of the provisions by which the Prabandh Sanchalak is to be appointed is not the subject matter of a challenge before us.