HARIKANT MISHRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) COUNTER and rejoinder affidavits are exchanged and there fore, as requested and agreed by learned Counsel for the parties this writ petition has been heard and is being decided finally at the admission stage under the Rules of the Court.

(2.) AGGRIEVED by the order dated 1. 3. 2007 whereby the Registrar, Jagadguru Rambhadracharya Viklang Viswavidyalaya, Chitrakoot (hereinafter referred to as the "university") has informed the petitioner that his services would come to an end on 31. 3. 2007, the petitioner Dr. Harikant Mishra has approached this Court in the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seek ing a writ of certiorari for quashing the said order. He has also sought a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to pay him regular salary and not to interfere in his peaceful functioning as Lecturer/assistant Professor in the Univer sity. By means of amendment the petitioner has further challenged the order dated 31. 3. 2007, whereby the University has communicated its decision to the petitioner of abolition of post held by him.

(3.) THE respondents No. 3, 4 and 5 have filed counter-affidavit and supplemen tary counter-affidavit. A separate counter-affidavit has been filed replying the amended paragraphs of writ petition which have been incorporated subsequently. THE case of respondents No. 3, 4 and 5 is that the University is a private body, therefore, writ petition under Article 12 of the Constitution is not maintainable. On merits, it is said that the University had taken a decision to abolish the post of Lecturers in the Department of Philosophy and Political Science and for the said purpose, letter dated 28. 3. 2007 has been issued by the Vice Chancellor commu nicating decision of Board of Governors to Registrar, Jagadguru Rambhadracharya Sansthan (hereinafter referred to as the "society") which is a Society registered under Societies Registration Act and is established the said University. THE afore said decision of the Board of Governors of University has been approved by the Society, as is evident from its letter dated 28. 3. 2007 (Annexure-CA-2 to the counter-affidavit ). THE petitioner was appointed under the Scheme of UGC sanctioned under Xth five year plan and the said appointment was to continue till the life of the said plan i. e. 31. 3. 2007. THE aforesaid fact was clearly mentioned in the appoint ment letter of the petitioner. It was also mentioned therein that the post may likely to continue depending upon the availability of the post and performance of the candidate. It is said that the appointment of the petitioner was more in the nature of contract depending upon certain terms and conditions specifically mentioned in the letter of appointment. He was never appointed on a permanent post nor he has a right to continue on the post of Lecturer when the post itself stood abol ished after 31. 3. 2007. THE notice dated 1. 3. 2007 was served upon the petitioner in the similar manner as it was served upon other Lecturers appointed under the posts created under Xth five year plan and the petitioner has not been singled out for the said purpose. Once the termination of the services of the petitioner is in accordance with the terms and conditions of his appointment, he cannot raise any objection there against and the writ petition challenging the order of termina tion, therefore is clearly misconceived. It is said that the University is neither a Central University nor Deemed University nor a State University but is a private University though is established under the Act. It is said that with reference to para 5 (iii) of the guidelines framed by the UGC for providing financial assistance to various Universities the matter was considered by the UGC itself in view of the fact that various Universities were facing difficulty in obtaining assistance from the respective State Governments regarding taking over liability of the posts after the plan is over and vide letter dated 29. 3. 2004 (Annexure-CA-3), UGC gave three options to such Universities for filling up the post, approved during Xth five year plan to safeguard the interest of the institution which are as under: "1. Assurance may be obtained from the State Government for taking over the liability of these posts after tenth plan period. Or 2. Assurance may be given by the University through a resolution of the Executive Council to bear the burden of these posts after tenth plan. Or 3. Appointment shall be made on contractual basis. " It also provides that the University may opt for any of the above three options for filling up the post. In case of contractual appointments also UGC provided that the University shall follow the requisite qualifications etc. of the posts as provided under UGC regulations. It is said that vide letter dated 31. 3. 2007, the University has informed UGC also about abolition of post held by the petitioner.