GANESH PRASAD Vs. CHANCELLOR PURVANCHAL UNIVERSITY JAUNPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. A. Sharma, J, In 1973 both, the petitioner and the respondent No. 4, were appointed as lecturers on regular basis in Shri Durgaji Post Graduate Mahavidyalaya, Chandesar District Azamgarh (hereinafter referred to as the College) on the recommendation of the Selection Committee. Both of them there after continued to work in the College. , The Vice-Chancellor of the Gorakhpur University to which the College was af filiated earlier, prepared in 1981 a seniority list of the teachers of the College. Petitioner filed a representation on 3-1-1982 against the said seniority list before the Vice-Chancellor. The representation was, however, not disposed of by the Vice-Chancellor and remained in pending. In 1987 the Purvanchal University, Jaunpur, was established and the College was af filiated to it. The petitioner thereafter filed a representation in connection with his seniority before the Principal of the College, who upheld the claim of the petitioner by holding him senior to the respondent No. 4. The respondent No. 4 filed an appeal against the above order before the Vice-Chancellor who, vide order dated 11-3-1991 allowed the appeal holding that the seniority list prepared by the Vice-Chancellor in 1981 showing the respondent No. 4 as senior to the petitioner cannot be interfered with by the Principal of the College. Against the above order of the Vice-Chancellor the petitioner filed a representation under Section 68 of the State Universities Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) before the Chancellor, who dismissed it vide order dated 23-11-1991 on the ground that the seniority list prepared by the Vice-Chancellor in 1981 cannot be disturbed by the Principal, because it has become final, as it was neither challenged before the Principal under statute 18. 14 nor was a representation filed against it before the Chancellor. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders of the Vice Chancellor and the Chancellor, the petitioner filed this writ petition.

(2.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Vice-the Principal of the College. In this con nection learned counsel has pointed out that the Vice-Chancellor is the appellate authority against the order of the Principal of the College, who is empowered to decide the dispute of seniority of the teachers of the affiliated college. It is, therefore, contended that the order of the Vice-Chancellor is without jurisdiction and is nullity. Learned counsel for the respondents has supported the aforesaid order of the Vice-Chancellor.

(3.) IN view of the provisions contained in Statute 18. 14 the dispute regarding the seniority between the petitioner and the respondent No. 4, can be decided by the Principal of the College and not by the Vice Chancellor of the University. The Vice Chancellor, being the appellate authority against the decision of the prin cipal, could not have exercised the original jurisdiction which is vested in the Prin cipal. Supreme Court in Surjit Ghosh v. Chairman and Managing Director, United Commercial Bank Ltd and others, 1995 (1) UPLBEC 566, has laid down that the ap pellate authority cannot exercise the original jurisdiction, because in such a case the concerned employee is deprived of the right of appeal which is a substantive right given to him by the Rules. IN this connection the Supreme Court has laid down as under: "it is true that when an authority higher than the disciplinary authority itself imposes the punishment, the order of punishment suffers from no illegality when no appeal is provided to such authority. However, when an appeal is provided to the higher authority concerned against the order of the disciplinary authority or of a lower authority and the higher authority passes an order of punishment the employee concerned is deprived of the remedy of appeal which is a substantive right given to him by the Rules/regulations. An employee cannot be deprived of his substantive right. ' Therefore, the Vice-Chancellor does not have the jurisdiction to determine the seniority of the teachers of the affiliated College.