GIRENDRA PAL DR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Dr. Girendra Pal is Principal of Dr. Madan Pratap Khutenta Rajasthan Homoeopathic Medical College, Jaipur (for short, Homoeopathic Medical College) since the year 1977. THEre are various authorities of the University of Rajasthan under Sec. 17 of. the University of Rajasthan Act, 1946 (for short, the Act) and one of those authorities is Syndicate. THE Syndicate is executive body of the University and as per Section 21 of the Act and as provided thereunder it consists of the persons named; therein and under its sub-section (l) (vi) it also consists of two Principals to, be nominated by the State Government. As the petitioner was the Principal of Homoeopathic Medical College, he was nominated to the Syndicate of the University of Rajasthan by the State Government for a period of three years under order dated March 16, 1991. THE said order was withdrawn by the State Government under order Annr. 1 dated February 26/27, 1993. THE said order dated February 26/27, 1993 reads as under: - " Shri Girendra Pal, Principal, Homoeopathic Medical College, Jaipur was nominated as a Member of the Syndicate of the University of Rajasthan, Jaipur for a period of three years under Sec. 21 (l) (vi) of the University of Rajasthan Act, 1946, vide Government order F. 3 (kha-12) Edu. IV/80 dated the 16. 03. 1991. Since information has been received in respect of Shri Girendra Pal that he has association with organisation-banned under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, the State Government does not consider it appropriate 'to continue him as a Member of above mentioned Syndicate, and as such the nomination of Shri Girendra Pal made vide above mentioned order dated 16. 03. 1991, is hereby withdrawn with immediate effect. " THE petitioner has challenged the aforesaid order under which his tenure of three years as a Member of the Syndicate has been reduced/curtailed, inter alia on the grounds that there is no provision to curtail he tenure of a Member nominated to the Syndicate; the above extracted order does not disclose as to with which material that the petitioner was a member of any banned organisation has been placed before the Court and even the so-called intelligence report on the basis of which the petitioner has been dubbed as a Member of the banned organisation has been filed and that there has been violation of the principles of natural justice.

(2.) LEARNED Advocate General who has appeared for the State of Rajasthan has supported the impugned order primarily on the ground that the nomination of the petitioner to the authority of the University, i. e. , Syndicate, was made by the State Government and it was always at the pleasure of the State Government and in exercise of the pleasure the impugned order has-been made. Reliance in this connection has been placed on Section 18 of the Rajasthan General Clauses Act, 1955 (for short, the Act of 1955) and according to the learned Advocate General in view of the aforesaid provision the authority which has the power to make appointment has also the power to remove the person appointed by it in exercise of those powers. It is further the case of the respondent that it was on the basis of intelligence report to the effect that the petitioner is associated with the activities of RSS, a banned organisation, that the impugned order of withdrawing the nomination of the petitioner has been made. In such a case where the appointment/nominations are made and are always at the pleasure of the State Government, the State Government has a right to withdraw it and the principles of natural justice are not attracted and no opportunity of hearing was necessary to be given to the petitioner. The State has gone even to the extent that the nomination of the petitioner was political in nature and therefore, the State Government could withdraw the same. The petitioner has filed rejoinder wherein it was denied that he was ever associated with RSS which is a banned organisation under Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (for short, the Act of 1967 ).

(3.) CONSEQUENTLY, I hereby allow this writ petition and quash the impugned order Annr. 1 dated February 26/27, 1993, of the State Government withdrawing the order dated March 16,1991 and declare that the petitioner shall be deemed to be nominated as a Member of the Syndicate for the remainder period of three years and direct the respondent to allow the petitioner to function as nominated member of the Syndicate for the remainder period of his term. The petitioner shall get Rs. 2,000/- as costs of this writ petition from the respondent. .