A.Banerji, J. - (1.) The petitioner claim es that he is entitled to officiate as the Acting Principal of the College, as the order extending the term of respondent no. 4 as Principal of the College is bad in law. He has, therefore, prayed for the quashing of the order, dated 5th January, 1985 passed by the State Government extending the term of respondent no. 4 as Principal until 30th June, 1985.
(2.) An interim order had been passed by the Court on 17th January, 1985 staying the operation of the order dated 5th January, 1985 which has been extending from time to time till 30th April, 1985. The period has also expired.
(3.) Having heard the learned counsel, we are of the view that this is not a fit case for interference in exercise of the power of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution.;