- (1.) PRAKASH Krishna, J. The petitioner, who was working as officiating Registrar of Sampurnanand Sanskrit University, Varanasi, has challenged the order dated 9-12-2002 passed by the Vice-Chancellor Sampurnandan University. By the said order the Vice-Chancellor relieved the petitioner from the post of officiating Registrar and directed Gangadhar Panda, Head Puranatihas to discharge the functions of the Registrar in addition to the duties attached to his post as professor.
(2.) WE have heard Sri T. P. Singh Counsel for the petitioner and Sri W. H. Khan Counsel for the newly added respondent Sri Gangadhar Panda, who was impleaded as respondent on his own accord. Briefly stated the case of the petitioner is that he was appointed as Assistant Registrar by the State Government in pursuance of the recommendation of U. P. Public Service Commission with effect from 16th July, 1991. He was subsequently promoted to the post of Deputy Registrar on officiating basis vide order dated 10-9-1998. He has been officiating as Registrar in Sampurnanand Sanskrit University since 1998. The services of the petitioner are governed by the U. P. State Universities (Centralized Service) Rules, 1975. The impugned order dated 9-12-2002 was passed by the Vice-Chancellor taking away the officiating charge of the Registrar from him without there being any basis. Further, it has been alleged that the Vice-Chancellor has no authority to pass the impugned order as the State Government is the appointing authority. The newly added respondent, namely, Sri Gangadhar Panda, has a different story to tell. According to him he is senior in the seniority list of Deputy Registrars being at Sl. No. 4, while the petitioner is at Sl. No. 9. The persons mentioned at Sl. Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 7 have already been promoted to the post of Registrar. The true copy of the seniority list dated 18th November, 2002 was filed as Annexure-1 to the affidavit filed in support of the impleadment application. The Vice-Chancellor, on account of some untoward happening on 4-12-2002 passed the impugned order and some disciplinary proceedings are also contemplated against the petitioner. Further Shri Panda being the seniormost Deputy Registrar at present, is proposed to be posted on the post of Registrar in Sampurnanand Sanskrit University and he is ordinarily entitled to officiate as Registrar.
(3.) WE have carefully considered the respective arguments of the learned Counsel. It is well-settled and reasonable that ordinarily the seniormost person should be permitted to officiate on the vacancy. This is reasonable also. Indisputably Sri Panda, who has been posted as Deputy Registrar in Sampurnanand Sanskrit University is senior to the petitioner as per seniority list dated 8th November, 2000. Part II Section of U. P. State University Service (Centralised Service) Rules, 1975 creates a cadre: (1) Registrar, (2) Deputy Registrar and (3) Assistant Registrar. The petitioner was only an officiating Registrar and hence he has no right to the post. By the impugned order he has not been relieved from the substantive post of Deputy Registrar. The newly added respondent being senior Deputy Registrar to the petitioner, we see no illegality in the impugned order dated 9-12-2002 passed by the respondent No. 2. It is reasonable as well as equitable that as and when a vacancy occurs in a higher post, ordinarily the senior most person on the immediately lower post should be allowed to officiate for the time being. Sri T. P. Singh, Senior Advocate for the petitioner, could not pointout violation of any provision of the Service Rules. The petitioner, by means of a supplementary affidavit tried to raise a factual controversy that the impugned order was not passed after consultation with the State Government, but by the Vice- Chancellor on his own accord. In support of this he referred to the affidavit containing the allegation that the petitioner had telephonic conversation with the Officers of the State Government who have contradicted the averments made by the Vice-Chancellor in the impugned order that the State Government has also agreed to the passing of the impugned order. WE do not want to enter into that controversy because that is wholly irrelevant in our view. Even otherwise the newly added respondent being senior to the petitioner is entitled to officiate on the post of the Registrar. The petitioner having failed to point out violation of any provision of the Service Rules, the writ petition is devoid of merit and it is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed. .;