M.Katju, J. - (1.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
(2.) This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 24.6.2003. (Annexure-l to the petition) by which respondent No. 2 has been given charge as officiating Principal of the M.L.N. Medical College, Allahabad. The petitioner has also prayed for a direction to respondent No. 1. State of U.P., to handover charge of officiating Principal of M.L.N. Medical College, Allahabad to the petitioner being senior most Professor in the College.
(3.) Admittedly, at present there is no permanent Principal in the Medical College, since the selection has to be done by the U.P. Public Service Commissioner. The question, therefore, arises as to who should be appointed ad-hoc Principal when there is no permanent Principal in the Medical College. It appears that there is no statutory provision or Rule which mentions as to who should be appointed ad hoc Principal in the absence of the permanent Principal. Thus, there appears to be a legal vacuum on the point and hence, that has to be filled in by judicial verdict. It is well settled that while the Judges cannot violate statutory law, they can fill in the gaps in the law, as held in several decisions of the Supreme Court e.g., Directorate of Enforcement v. Deepak Mahajan, 1994 (3) SCC 440 (vide Para 28). In that decision the Supreme Court referred to the observation of Judge Frank in Guiseppi v. Walling, which reads thus : "The necessary generality in the wordings of many statutes and ineptness of drafting in others frequently compels the Court, as best as they can, to fill in the gaps, an activity which no matter how one may label it, is in part legislative. Thus, the Courts in their way, as administrators perform the task of supplementing statutes. In the case of Courts, we call it 'interpretation' of 'filling in the gaps'; in the case of administrators we call it 'delegation' or authority to supply the details.";