K.N.Goyal, J. - (1.) In the Commerce Department of the University of Lucknow some posts of Lecturers were vacant. Regular appointments can be made only after following the procedure laid down in Section 31 of the U. P. State Universities Act, 1973. Under Section 13 (6) of that Act the Vice-Chancellor in exercise of his emergency powers can make appointments on ad hoc basil.. Such appointments can last for a maximum period of six months as laid down in Section 13 (8). However, there is no bar in Section 13 (8) to the same person being reappointed on the expiry of the said maximum period. Accordingly, the petitioner was initially appointed as ad hoc teacher by order dated 28-12-1974, a copy of which is Annexure A.-1 to the counter-affidavit of Sri H.L. Yadava. Acting Registrar of the University. This appointment commenced on 1-1-1975. Thereafter the appointment was renewed from time to time. By order, Annexure A-4 to the same counter affidavit, it was extended till 3lth September, 1979. It may be mentioned here that in the meantime in 1978 an advertisement was issued inviting applications for regular appointment to the two posts of temporary Lecturers in Commerce. That advertisement is Annexure 1 to the writ petition. On 5-10-1979 an order was passed, vide Annexure A-5 to the said counter-affidavit, and Annexure 13 to the writ petition, to appointing the petitioner on ad hoc basis from 1 10-1979 till further orders. This time the appointment was not made for the normal period of six months.
(2.) On 13-9-1979 a Selection Committee constituted under Section 31 met and its decisions are contained in Annexure 2 to the writ petition which is identical to Annexure A-8 to the counter-affidavit. The Selection Committee placed two other persons, namely, Shri Ghaashyam Das Pattani and Sri Fida Husain Ansan in order of preference at serial nos. (1) and (2) for the two posts. The minutes also mentioned that the experts, however recommended that the petitioner, Dr. Siya Ram, be also placed as the 3rd candidate in order of merit. The appointing authority is Executive Council of the University, vide Section 21 (1) (vii) of the Act. Accordingly, these recommendations were placed before the Executive Council winch did not agree with the Selection Committee. The meeting of.the Executive Council at which these recommendations were considered took place on 28-9-1778. The Vice Chancellor is the Chairman of the Executive Council, vide Section 21 (1), (a), and the Registrar K is its Ex-office Secretary, vide Section t6 C4). It may, therefore, be presumed that the minutes ate recorded by the Registrar under the instructions of the Vice-Chancellor. As is the normal practice, the minutes are placed before the next following meeting for confirmation as the first item of the agenda. The minutes as recorded on 28-9-1978 were not accepted as correct by the Executive Council. When it was asked to confirm them at its meeting dated 23-1.0-1979. The rectification in the miuutes as accepted by the Executive Council, however, again gave rise to controversy. When the minutes of the betting dated 23-10-19/9 came up for confirmation at the meeting dated 26-12-1979, the Executive Council did not accept the minutes as correct and made certain modifications, The minutes of these three meetings are Annexures 3, 4 and 5 respectively to the writ petition.
(3.) The Vice-Chancellor in pursuance of the decision of the Executive Council dated 28-9-1979 referred the matter to the Chancellor under Section 31 (8) (a) on 18-10-1979. With this reference he enclosed the decision of the Executive Council in the form originally recorded by him on 28-9-1979. Alter the meeting of the Executive Council dated 23-10-1579. he forwarded to the Chancellor on 31-10-1979, vide Annexure 5, the modified resolution of the Executive Council as recorded by the Vice-Chancellor on 23-10-1979. On 24-11-1979 the Secretary to the chancellor issued a letter to the Registrar intimating him that the chancellor bad "accepted" the recommendations of the Executive Council and had directed re advertisement of the posts. This letter is Annexure 6 to the writ petition. On the same date, under orders of the Vice-Chancellor, an office memorandum was , vide Annexure 12, terminating the ad hoc appointment of the petitioner with effect from the same afternoon and paying him one month's salary in lieu of notice. On 4-12 1979 at an emergency meeting one of the members of the Executive Council, Sri H K. Awastbi, moved a resolution to the effect that the Executive Council noted with concern that in the matter of selection of the lecturers in the Department of Commerce the correct facts of the matter had not reached H. E.. the chancellor in their proper perspective. It wits further stated that the minutes were not being correctly recorded and even the inaccuracies removed at the subsequent meeting were not properly incorporated and thus the letter sent to the chancellor on 31-10.1979 did not represent the views of the Executive Council as it wished it to be. A copy of the minutes relating to this resoluter is Annexure 7 to the petition. On the same date, another member of the Executive Council, Sri Abdui Mannan, moved another resolution whereby the Executive Council resolved to continue certain ad hoc appointments til 31-12- 1979. Reference was made, inter alia, to the appointments of the petitioner and the other candidates whose names had been approved by the Selection Committee, namely, Sri Partani and Sri Ansari whose appointments had been terminated by the Vice Chancellor. A copy of the relevant minutes is Annexure A 5 to the counter-affidavit.;