BHIM RAO AMBEDKAR Vs. HARI NARAYAN THAKUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the writ petitioner, Respondent No.1 and learned counsel for the Respondent No. 3 as well as learned counsel for the Chancellor.

(2.) We have gone through the order under appeal dated 22.4.2011 whereby CWJC.No. 4626 of 2011* preferred by Dr. Hari Narayan Thakur, Respondent No.1 has been allowed and order of transfer with respect to him dated 1.3.2011 has been quashed mainly on the ground that the decision appeared to be rushed decision and as to why such a decision was taken was not known and no material had been brought to help the Court in coming to the conclusion that the order of transfer is for administrative reason.

(3.) Learned counsel for the appellants has taken us through the communication made by the Vice-Chancellor on 28.2.2011 to show that the University and the Vice- Chancellor had come to a conclusion that a Principal of another College as well as the writ petitioner Dr. Hari Narayan Thakur had lost their academic and administrative control over the Colleges concerned and their appropriate replacement had become the need of the hour. The impugned order of transfer shows that after obtaining approval of the Chancellor the Vice-Chancellor had ordered for transfer of the writ petitioner and three other Principals and had posted them in Colleges mentioned against their names. The writ petitioner was shifted from R.S.S. Mahila College, Sitamarhi to S.R.A.P. College, Barachakia and Principal of that College Dr. Mamta Singh, a lady was transferred to the R.S.S. Mahila College, Sitamarhi. The approval of the Chancellor to such transfer appears to have been taken by way of abundant precaution and that approval is available at Annexure-4 to the LPA bv way of letter dated 28.2.2011.