M C NANDEESHA Vs. ML BHOWMIK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a professor in Aquaculture since 2001 in the College of Fisheries at Lambucherra under the Central Agricultural University, the third respondent herein. The first respondent Dr. M. L. Bhowmik is the Dean of the said College of Fisheries. According to the petitioner, the appointment of Dr. Bhowmik as Dean was in violation of Statute 4 of the First Statutes which are part of the Central Agricultural University Act, 1992 (for short, 'the Act') appearing in the schedule thereto inasmuch as he was not eligible for such appointment as he did not fulfill the requirement of the said provision. Statute 4 of First Statutes the said University provides:-

(2.) THE eligibility criteria gleaned from the above provision is that for appointment as a Dean, a person must be a professor in the same college and has not attained the age of sixty years. Admittedly, Dr. Bhowmik was not a professor of the said college and he attained the age of sixty years at the time of his appointment as Dean which fact prompted the petitioner to put under challenge the appointment of Dr. Bhowmik as Dean. The said appointment of Dr. Bhowmik being in violation of the provision contained in Statute 4, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of quo warranto in terms of his prayer that Dr. Bhowmik should be declared to have held the office of the Dean of the college of Fisheries without having required eligibility as required under Statute 4 (1) and directing the second respondent, the Vice-Chancellor of the University to withdraw/revoke the appointment or extension of appointment of the first respondent to the office of the Dean. According to the petitioner, the office of the Dean is a public office which is held by Dr. Bhowmik without legal authority and, therefore, even a stranger can ask for appropriate remedy by a writ of quo warranto.

(3.) ALL the three respondents filed a common affidavit-in-opposition contend-ing, inter alia, that a writ of quo warranto does not lie in the given facts of the case as the office of the Dean of the college of Fisheries is not a public office. It has, however, been admitted that in view of the provisions contained in Statute 4 the Dean has to be a professor of the University, but contended at the same time that Dr. Bhowmik was appointed without violating the said provision as the University conformed to the norms contained in ICAR regulations which permits an incumbent holding a position equivalent to the rank of a professor to continue in the office of the Dean upto the age of 65 years. It has, however, been admitted that before appointment to the post of Dean in the said college, Dr. Bhowmik, had served at Central Institute of Freshwater Aquacul-ture, Kalyani as Principal Scientist wherefrom he retired attaining the age of sixty years and at the time of his retirement from that office, he was drawing the pay of Rs. 20,450/- in the pay scale of Rs. 16,400-22,400/ -. According to the respondent, the post of Principal Scientist held by Dr. Bhowmik being equivalent to the post of professor in an Agricultural University, there was no illegality in his appointment to the office of the Dean of the said college.