SANJAY KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) IN this writ application the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:

(3.) PER contra, Mr. Lalit Kishore, Principal AAG, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State, has submitted that the writ petition at the instance of the petitioner is not maintainable as he himself is not an aspirant or a candidate for the post of Vice Chancellor/ Pro Vice Chancellor. He has further submitted that the Members of the Search Committee are not holders of the public office and as such, no writ in the nature of Quo Warranto can be issued by this Court for their removal as a Member of the Search Committee. According to Mr. Lalit Kishore only two types of persons can challenge the nomination on the post of Search Committee, firstly, such a person who can himself be a Member of the Search Committee or a person who being a candidate for the post of Vice Chancellor/ Pro Vice Chancellor is being adjudged by the Search Committee. In this regard Mr. Kishore has referred to paragraph no.24 to the writ application for demonstrating that the petitioner does not fall in either of the two categories. Reliance in this regard has been placed by him on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of D. Nagaraj v. State of Karnataka & ors., reported in AIR 1977 SC 876 and in the case of Mohd. Shafi Pandow v. State of J & K & ors., reported in (2001)10 SCC 447. Mr. Kishore had also dwelt upon the aspect that there is a world of difference between an Ex -officio and a nominated Member of the Senate of the University and merely because someone is a Member of the Senate which has absolutely no role to play in selection and appointment of the Vice Chancellor/ Pro Vice Chancellor, he does not stand disqualified from being a Member of the Search Committee. He has also submitted that Mr. Kunal as a matter of fact has never attended a single meeting of the Senate of the University ever since he has relinquished of the post of Vice Chancellor of the University in the month of February, 2004. In this connection he has also referred to an undertaking already given by Mr. Kunal that in future also he does not intend to attend any meeting of the Senate of the University or to have any concerned with the affairs of the University. Reliance in this regard has also been placed by Mr. Lalit Kishore on a Division Bench judgment of Allahabad High Court in the case of Kashi Nath Misra v. Chancellor, University of Allahabad & ors., reported in AIR 1967 Allahabad 101. Mr. Lalit Kishore has produced the letter of respondent no.9 dated 28.10.2013 which reads as follows: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_354_TLPAT0_2014.jpg</IMG> <IMG>JUDGEMENT_354_TLPAT0_20141.jpg</IMG>