P KUSUMA KUMARI Vs. STATE OF AP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was hitherto the Vice-Chancellor of Sri Krishna Devaraya University, Anantapur, (henceforth referred to as `University') has been removed from the said office by the Chancellor through orders dated 1.8.2010. Consequent thereto the State Government has made incharge arrangement through their orders contained in G.O.Rt. No. 546, Higher Education (UE.I) Department, dated 1.8.2010, validity of both these orders is challenged in this writ petition.

(2.) The writ petitioner submitted that she was appointed as the Vice- Chancellor of the University and assumed charge of the said office on 23.8.2008 and that she was discharging her duties with utmost devotion and that she was carrying on the functions in accordance with the spirit of the Universities Act and rules and regulations framed by the University and that she has been functioning quite transparently and openly. The Executive Council Meeting of the University was held on 17.12.2008 and at that meeting it was unanimously resolved to regularize the services of eight Assistant Professors who have been appointed earlier under X Plan Scheme and that though she wanted to record her dissent, she could not do so inasmuch as the Principal Secretary to the Government in the Higher Education Department and the Secretary to the Government in the Finance Department, both are ex-officio members of the said Executive Council and present at the meeting have approved of the proposed action of regularization of those teachers. It is further pointed out that the attempts made by the University to make recruitment to 14 posts of Assistant Professors in Group I and 15 posts of Assistant Professors in Group II had fallen through due to the intervention of this court, thus requiring re- notification of those very vacancies through separate notifications published on 4.2.2009 and 5.2.2009 respectively. It is further submitted that entertaining an allegation that the writ petitioner has committed certain irregularities, the State Government appointed a Two Men Committee under the Chairmanship of Professor K.C.Reddy to inquire into the allegations. It is submitted that Professor K.C.Reddy Committee has been apprised of all the facts and made available the necessary records and files for its perusal and it submitted its report holding that several of the allegations leveled against the writ petitioner are baseless. But, however, Prof. K.C.Reddy Committee has recommended to appraise this court of its findings relating to the fixation of roaster points for recruitment of Assistant Professors, since WP No. 18681 of 2009 which was filed challenging the validity of the aforementioned two notifications, was pending. It is further pointed out that the said writ petition has been dismissed by this court on 22.1.2010, even before the University could take any action to bring to it's notice the findings of Professor K.D.Reddy Committee. It is further stated that the State Government through their letter dated 10.12.2009 directed the University to place the report of Prof. K.C.Reddy Committee before the Executive Council. Accordingly, steps are taken to place the report of Prof. K.C.Reddy Committee before the Executive Council Meeting scheduled for 16.12.2009. However, due to the concerted action of the members of the Executive Council, the meeting could not be held for want of quorum and consequently Prof.K.C.Reddy's Committee Report could not be placed at the said meeting. It is further asserted that several attempts were subsequently made for convening and holding the Executive Council Meeting, but, with little success. At this stage, the Chancellor of the University has appointed Justice A.Hanumanthu, a retired Judge of this Court as Enquiry Authority for conducting an enquiry against the writ petitioner for willful omission and refusal to carry out the provisions of the Universities Act, through a notification published by the State Government in their G.O. Ms. No. 17, Higher Education (UE-I) Department, dated 3.3.2010. It is further submitted that the Enquiry Authority had finalized and submitted its report on 31.7.2010 and after examining the findings of the report of the Enquiry Authority, the State Government observed that the writ petitioner has committed irregularities in appointments of Assistant Professors notified on 4.2.2009 and 5.2.2009 and issuing orders of appointment by willfully violating Section 19(5)(ii) of the A.P. Universities Act, 1991, and that the writ petitioner has violated the instructions issued by the Government through their letters dated 10.12.2009, 28.1.2010 and 19.2.2010 apart from committing financial and other irregularities. Based on the opinion tendered by the State Government, the Chancellor passed the impugned orders on 1st August 2010 removing the writ petitioner from the Office of the Vice-Chancellor of the University for her willful omission and refusal to carry out the provisions of the Universities Act, 1991. The State Government through their notification got published in G.O. Rt. No. 546, Higher Education (UE.I) Department, dated 1.8.2010, has made in-charge arrangements appointing the Vice-Chancellor of Yogi Vemana University, Kadapa as in-charge Vice-Chancellor of the respondent University with effect from 2.8.2010. Hence, the above writ petition has been instituted questioning the orders passed by the Chancellor in terms of Section 11(2) of the A.P. Universities Act 1991 and the notification of the government contained in G.O. Rt. No. 546, Higher Education (UE.I) Department, dated 1.8.2010 making in-charge arrangements.

(3.) I have heard Sri C.V.Mohan Reddy, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the learned counsel for the writ petitioner Sri M.Vidya Sagar and Sri A.Sudershan Reddy, learned Addl. Advocate General for the 1st respondent - State and Sri M.Ramalinga Reddy, learned Standing Counsel for the 2nd respondent University.