UTTAM BHIKARO NAIK Vs. GOA UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard.

(2.) Prior to the expiry of the term of appointment of the petitioner, the University issued a letter dated 14.10.2003, informing the petitioner that the term of his appointment would expire on 19.11.2003. The said letter was issued pursuant to a decision taken by the Executive Council of the University in its meeting dated 11.10.2003. The petitioner sought renewal of his appointment, but his representation came to be rejected and the post came to be advertised, afresh. Aggrieved by the so called termination of the services, the petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, a few days before the term of his appointment was to expire.

(3.) According to the petitioner, sub-section (2) of section 23 of the Goa University Act, 1984 suffers from vice of excessive delegation and is a clear case of abdication of power by the Legislature in favour of the Executive Council. Section 23 reads thus :