BIMAL KUMAR JAIN Vs. RAMAUTAR SHUKLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The question which has been raised in this writ application is as to whether respondent No. 1, who was earlier the Chairman of the Bihar Public Service Commission, could have been appointed as the Vice-Chancellor of the Patna University (hereinafter to be referred, to as 'the University') in view of Article 319 (b) of the Constitute on of India.

(2.) Respondent No, 1, was the Chairman of the Bihar Public Service Commission (hereinafter to be referred to as the Commission') and after ex pert of his term as the Chairman of the commission, he was appointed the Vice-Chancellor of the said University which post he joined on 22-4-1980, Article 319 (b) of the Constitution of India is as follows;

(3.) Cause has been shown on behalf of the respondents including the University and the State of Bihar. On their behalf it has been asserted that the Vice-Chancellor of the University is appointed by the Chancellor in consultation with the State Government but it cannot be urged that in such a situation the Vice-Chancellor is under the employment of the State Government so as to attract the constitutional bar. Even the allegation regarding over-all control of the University by the State Government has been repudiated.