VINOD SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AMITAVA Lala, J. The writ petitioner has challenged the Annexure-13 being an order passed by the Secretary of the Institution allowing Dr. D. N. Singh, the respondent No. 5 to continue as Principal of the College until further orders.

(2.) ADMITTEDLY, according to the petitioner the continuation of officiation would be restricted for a period of three months as per first statute 10. 20 of the Purvanchal University. Such statute is still existing. The petitioner has filed the writ petition saying that he is continuing on the post as officiating Principal from the year 2002 and only when he obtained a leave of 40 days, Sri D. N. Singh-respondent No. 5 was appointed as officiating Principal. Therefore, when he joined back on 25th August, 2006, such date will be treated to be a cut-off date for inclusion of the petitioner on the post of officiating Principal in the place and instead of respondent No. 5.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel appearing for the petitioner relied upon the annexures to the rejoinder affidavit. He has shown many parts of the power of the Managing Committee. However, from the paragraph 29 (j) and (k) of the Statute being powers of Secretary of the College, are reproduced below: 29 (j) To grant leave to the employees of the college according to rules and to appoint substitutes and to make resultant arrangements or recommendations of the Principals of the College. (k) To issue letters of appointment, suspension and/or termination notice/show cause notices and punishment orders, as per, decisions of the Committee for appointments and/or the Managing Committee.