- (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties. By a judgment and order dated 06.2.1997 in Civil Appeal No. 5322/83, this Court held that continuation of the petitioner was not approved by the Vice chancellor and, therefore, direction sought by the management (appellant in that case) cannot be given. This Court dismissed the appeal by considering all the contentions raised by the parties. The Court observed thus:- "It would be obvious that only a qualified and competent Lecturer should be selected and its approval sought. It does not appear that such a procedure was followed. That apart as per the statute as pointed out by the Vice Chancellor, mithlesh Kumar alias Krantesh, does not even possess, the minimum qualification for the post. The learned Counsel repeatedly reiterated that he was qualified without placing any unimpeachable documentary evidence in disproof of the finding by the Vice Chancellor. "
(2.) In view of the aforesaid finding given by this Court, petitioner was not only unqualified to be appointed but his continuation in the service after 30. 6.1978 was illegal.
(3.) Subsequently, petitioner approached the Chancellor of the University by filing a representation. The Chancellor by his order dated 28.5.1997, dismissed the representation by observing that this court had dismissed the appeal and has approved the order passed by the Vice chancellor, Bundelkhand University and, therefore, there was no justification to challenge the said order under Section 68 of the U. P. State Universities Act.;