P C GUPTA Vs. CHANCELLOR MEERUT UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -Principal of a Degree College, who was Vice-Chancellor as well for sometime of another University, has assailed correctness of order dated 25th August, 1981 passed by the Chancellor allowing two references u/Section 68 of State Universities Act, against the orders of Vice Chancellor one disapproving resolution of the Committee of Management accepting petitioner's resignation and the other dismissing him from service after enquiry etc.

(2.) IN point of time disciplinary proceedings were initiated first with suspension of petitioner in October, 1977, its revocation by the Vice Chancellor on 7th November, 1977, submission of charge-sheet and appointment of INquiry Officer by the Management on the day the order was revoked, stay of disciplinary proceedings by the Vice Chancellor on 28th August, 1978, setting aside of the order of revocation of Vice Chancellor by the Chancellor on 29th August, 1978, and direction to decide if suspension was valid and in accordance with law, fresh suspension of petitioner on 3rd September, 1978 and the order dated 7th October, 1978 passed by the Vice Chancellor on representation against second suspension order to decide the proceedings within two months resulting in resolution dated 28th January, 1979 dismissing petitioner from service its non approval by the Vice Chancellor on 2nd May, 1979 and direction to reinstate petitioner with immediate effect, as none of the thirty charges established misconduct, embezzlement, wilful neglect of duty or mismanagement.

(3.) ISSUE of resignation may be examined first as if the finding of the Chancellor in this regard is well founded and petitioner ceased to be Principal of the College with effect from 7th May, 1978 then it may be academic to decide if the direction to Committee of Management to continue disciplinary proceedings it so desired is sustainable in law. Conditions of service of teachers of affiliated Colleges is governed by Section 35 of State Universities Act, 1973. Its subsection (2) provides that, every decision of the Management of such college to dismiss or remove a teacher or to reduce him in rank or to punish him in any other manner shall before it is communicated to him, be reported to the Vice Chancellor and shall not effect unless it has been approved by the Vice Chancellor. The procedure provided for approval which has been construed as a salutary check on the powers of management to dispense with service of a teacher has been applied to, ' to any decision to terminate the service of a teacher, whether by way of punishment or otherwise, ' by sub-section (3) of the same Section. The word ' otherwise ' has been held to be wide enough to include ceasure of employment by resignation in P. K. Mukerji v. Committee of Management, 1984 UP LB EC 183. It was held that resignation also required approval as it was termination within meaning of sub-section (3) of Section 35. The objective of provisions of approval in enactments or rules dealing with educational institutions to protect the interest of teacher has been emphasised by the Courts time and again. Such provisions have been held to act as to check on arbitrary exercise of power by Management. Since they are incorporated for benefit of the teachers who are weaker in the bargain they have been construed liberally so as to advance purpose of their enactment. The construction of sub-section (3) by the bench in Mukerji's case and its extension to resignation as well was in consonance with principle of interpretation. The submission of learned counsel for Management, therefore, to refer it to larger bench to examine the correctness of Mukerji's case is devoid of any merit.