V.K. Khanna, J. - (1.) ON 31st July 1983 the petitioner was appointed as temporary Lecturer for teaching evening classes which were being run by the Kashi Vidyapeeth, Varanasi on a consolidated salary of Rs. 1000/ - per month. It is not disputed that the aforesaid appointment had been made in pursuance of an advertisement which had called for applications for appointing Lecturers for the day classes as well as for the evening classes. A Selection Committee had interviewed the candidates,. The petitioner was not selected for the post of Lecturer for the day classes. He along with two other persons was, however, selected for the evening classes by the Selection Committee. On 4 -12 -1985 the petitioner was appointed a Lecturer for a period of six months or till regular appointment was made in exercise of the powers under Section 16(6)(8) of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 (hereinafter described as the "Act"). The aforesaid appointment was repeated by appointment letters dated 12 -1 -1986, 13 -7 -1986 and 28 -2 -1987 which are contained in Annexures '3", "4" and "5" to the writ petition. All these appointments were made in exercise of the emergency powers under Section 13(6)(8) of the Act.
(2.) THE petitioner in this writ petition has sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to absorb the petitioner on the permanent post of Lecturer Social Work, Kashi Vidyapeeth, Varanasi. It has been urged that in view of the provisions of Section 31(3)(b) of the Act, the petitioner should be deemed to have been absorbed permanently on the post of Lecturer Social Work, Kashi Vidyapeeth, Varanasi. On behalf of the Kashi Vidyapeeth, Varanasi counter affidavit and supplementary counter affidavits have been filed. Along with the supplementary counter affidavit the proceedings of the Selection Committee have been filed which shows that on the post of Lecturers for the day Classes 19 applications were received which included the petitioner. However, the petitioner was not recommended by the Selection Committee for appointment as Lecturer for the day classes. It is also clear that the advertisement for the post of day Lecturers was separate. In pursuance of the separate advertisement for the post of Lecturers for the evening classes only 9 applications were received and out of the 9 applicants the Selection Committee had recommended the names of three persons to be appointed as temporary lecturers for teaching evening classes which included the name of the petitioner.
(3.) THE sole question which arises for determination in this case is as to whether on the facts of this case the petitioner is entitled to the benefit of Section 31(3)(b) of the Act. From the undisputed facts it is clear that the petitioner had been recommended by the Selection Committee for being appointed in the evening classes on a consolidated salary of Rs. 1,000/. He was not recommended for being appointed as a Lecturer for the day classes. The petitioner had thus been appointed on the recommendation of the Selection Committee only to the evening classes. So far as the appointment of the petitioner as Lecturer to the day classes is concerned that has been done in exercise of emergency powers of the Vice Chancellor under Section 13(6)(8) of the Act. The relevant provisions of Section 13 which require consideration for adjudication of the question raised in this petition runs as follows: 13. Powers and duties of the Vice Chancellor. - -(6) Where any matter is of urgent nature requiring immediate action and the same could not be immediately dealt with by any officer or the authority or other body of the University empowered by or under this Act to deal with it, the Vice Chancellor may take such action as he may deem fit and shall forthwith report the action taken by him to the Chancellor and also to the officer, authority, or other body who or which in the ordinary course would have dealt with the matter. Provided that no such action shall be taken by the Vice Chancellor without the previous approval of the Chancellor, if it would involve a deviation from the provisions of the Statutes or the Ordinances: Provided further that if the officers, authority or other body is of opinion that such action ought not to have been taken it may refer the matter to the Chancellor who may either confirm the action taken by the Vice Chancellor or annul the same to modify it in such manner, as he thinks fit and thereupon, it shall cease to have effect or, as the case may be taken effect in the modified form, so however that such annulment or modification shall be without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done by or under the order of the Vice Chancellor: (8) Where the exercise of the power by the Vice Chancellor under Sub -section (6) involves the appointment of an officer or a teacher of the University, such appointment shall terminate on appointment being made in the prescribed manner or on the expiration of a period of six months from the date of the order of the Vice Chancellor, whichever is earlier.;