YASHWANT VARMA,J. - (1.) THE challenge in the present petition is to the orders dated 27/12/2014 and 23/2/2015, said to have been passed by the Vice Chancellor of the Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidyapeeth, Varanasi.
(2.) THIS Court has heard Shri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Shri Ashish Kumar Ojha for the petitioners, Shri Lavlesh Shukla for the respondent University and Shri Indra Raj Singh and Shri Kamalesh Kumar Yadav who have intervened in these proceedings and have filed an Impleadment Application on behalf of Shri Anil Kumar and Anand Kishore Singh.
(3.) THE first order impugned seeks to postpone and stay elections to the Committee of Management of the institution which was stated to be convened and conducted on 28/12/2014. The second order dated 23/2/2015 purports to appoint an Administrator in accordance with the provisions of Statute 12 of the Statutes of the University. The order itself is a communication of a decision said to have been taken by the Vice Chancellor in exercise of powers conferred upon him under the Statutes aforementioned. Shri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioners has submitted that the impugned orders have been passed in gross violation of the principles of natural justice inasmuch as no opportunity of hearing was provided to the petitioners, nor were they put to notice of the impending action. He has further submitted that the elections to the Committee of Management did come to be held on 28/12/2014 in the backdrop that the order of the Vice Chancellor dated 27/12/2014 was never served upon the petitioners. Referring to the pleadings taken on the writ petition he submits that the communication itself appears to have been despatched on 03/1/2015 and was served on the petitioners only on 06/1/2015. He has further submitted that the grounds taken in the impugned orders are wholly unsustainable in light of the fact that it was the 2009 elections to the Committee of Management which stood referred for adjudication to the Assistant Registrar, Firms Societies and Chits. He further submits that the mere reference of a dispute in respect of the said elections does not detract from the fact that the Committee of Management elected as a consequence thereof had been accorded recognition by the Vice Chancellor himself vide his order dated 15/2/2010. In light of the aforesaid facts, he would submit, there existed no justification in the Vice Chancellor failing to exercise jurisdiction and according recognition to the elections held on 28/12/2014. He further submitted that for the above reasons, there did not exist any justification in the Vice Chancellor suspending the elections as has been done in terms of the order dated 27/12/2014.;