S. R. Singh and D. R. Chaudhary, JJ. - (1.) By means of the present petition, the petitioners have sought the relief of a writ of quo-warranto-setting aside the appointment and removing the 4th respondent from the office of the Principal, Dayanand College of Law. Kanpur and also a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the recommendations of the respondent No. 2 dated 3.8.1995 and the order of appointment dated 11.12.1995 made in favour of 4th respondent.
(2.) Dayanand College of Law, Kanpur [In short the 'College'] comes within the purview of the U. P. Higher Education Services Commission Act, 1980. To begin with, vacancy in the post of Principal of the College was publicised on 31st January, 1995. The 4th respondent, who was one of the applicants for the post in question, was recommended by the Higher Education Services Commission vide notification dated 3.8.1995 and as a sequel thereto, the Board of Management of the College issued appointment letter dated 11.12.1995 in favour of the 4th respondent who joined the College as its Principal. The writ petition was initially instituted by the Board of Management, Dayanand College of Law, 15/53 Civil Lines, Kanpur Nagar, through Sri Jagendra Swarup who claimed himself to be the Secretary of the Board of Management. A preliminary objection was brought to bear on behalf of the 4th respondent the quintessence of which is that Sri Jagendra Swarup was not the Secretary of the Board of Management and hence he was not entitled to institute the petition on behalf of the Board of Management. The application filed on behalf of Sri Jagendra Swarup son of late Sri Virendra Swarup resident of 15/69 Civil Lines, Kanpur, for being impleaded as petitioner, was, however, allowed vide order of dated 6.11.2000 thereby providing that the petition would be deemed to have been instituted by Sri Jagendra Swarup in his individual capacity without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties as to who is entitled to represent the Board of Management of the College. Application filed by the Board of Management, Dayanand College of Law, 15/53 Civil Lines, Kanpur Nagar, through its Secretary Sri Nagendra Swarup for impleadment too received approbation of the Court vide aforestated order dated 6.11.2000.
(3.) We have heard Sri R. N. Singh, senior advocate assisted by S/Sri A. P. Sahi and Yashwant Verma for the petitioners and Sri Vijai Bahadur Singh for the 4th respondent and Sri P. S. Baghel for Sri Nagendra Swarup. Nucleus of the submission canvassed by Sri R. N. Singh is that Dr. M. P. Singh was not qualified for being appointed as Principal of the Law College having regard to Rule 15 of the Rules made by the Bar Council of India, In vehement opposition. counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the 4th respondent was equipped with requisite qualification for the post as envisaged under the statutes applicable to the College and Rule 12 of the Rules (wrongly quoted as Rule 15 in the writ petition) made by the Bar Council of India would not invalidate the appointment for it was beyond the competence of the Bar Council of India to lay down qualifications of teachers including principal of an affiliated/associated college.;