DARBARA SINGH M SC Vs. VICE-CHANCELLORPUNJAB UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of both the writ petitions (Civil Writs Nos. 1425 of 1900 and 1452 of 1960) in which the points involved are identically the same.

(2.) The facts in Civil Writ No. 1425 of 1960 may be shortly stated. The petitioner who passed the Master of Science Examination of the Punjab University in 1927 has been in the employ of Khalsa College, Amritsar, as a Professor for several years. His name is borne on the register of Registered Graduates maintained by the Punjab University, his number on the register being 283. He was elected as a follow of the University from the Constituency of registered graduates in the elections which were held in the year 1956. The next election of fellows from the same Constituency has to take place on 15-9-1960. Under the regulations framed under the Punjab University Act (to be referred to as the Act), the Registrar of the Punjab University was appointed the Returning Officer by the Syndicate. The petitioner submitted his nomination paper duly proposed and seconded on the prescribed from in a registered cover which was addressed to the Registrar and it is common ground that it reached the Registrar in time. An order was made by Mr. J. R. Agnihotri, Registrar, who was the Returning Officer on the nomination paper of the petitioner on 20-8-1960 in the following terms: "Invalid as not addressed to the Returning Officer by name as required by regulation 24(ii) at page 4". It is stated in paragraph 5 of the petition that a representation was made by the petitioner to the Registrar with regard to the alleged illegal rejection of the nomination paper on the ground mentioned above and that the case was referred to the Vice-Chancellor who considered that he had no power to interfere with the decision of the Returning Officer. The representation for reconsideration was thus rejected by the Registrar as was clear from the Communication dated 25-8-1960 received from him. It is in these circumstances that the matter has been brought to this Court and various prayers have been made invoking the exercise of extraordinary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution.

(3.) Mr. Faqir Chand Mital who appears for the respondents has raised a preliminary objection to any relief being granted under Article 226 of the Constitution principally on the ground that the petitioners in both the petitions can challenge the election after it is held before the Tribunal provided by and in accordance with the procedure prescribed by regulation 24 (xvii) of the regulations framed under the provisions of the Act. It is necessary to refer to the relevant provisions of the Act and the regulations. Section 14(1) is to the effect that once in every year, on such date as the Chancellor may appoint in this behalf, there shall, if necessary, be an election to fill any vacancy among the Ordinary Fellows elected by Registered Graduates. Section 31 confers powers on the Senate to make regulations with tile sanction of the Government and Sub-section (2)(a) relates to the power to make regulations for "the procedure to be followed in holding any election of Ordinary Fellows". In regulation 24 it is provided inter alia: