D. K. Seth, J. - (1.) By means of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 16th July 1992 by means whereof his appointment as Chairman of the Department of Opthalmology in Faculty of Medicine, J. N. Medical College, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh (AMU for short) was declared to have ceased and the respondent No. 4 was declared as Chairman of the said Department by reason of an amendment made in the A. M. U. Ordinance (Academic) Chapter II promolgated on 18th January 1992 giving retrospective effect from 16th July 1992 on two fold grounds, namely, that the said amendment was carried on with malice and mala fide for the purpose of depriving the petitioner of the said post and that the said amendment in the Ordinance could that have been brought about by the Vice-Chancellor in exercise of his emergency power under Section 19(3) of the AMU Act, 1920. Secondly the order dated 16th July 1992 was wholly without jurisdiction and bad in law and could not have been passed on the basis of the amendment made on 18th July 1992 which could not be given retrospective effect, that too in exercise of emergency power. On these grounds, he has impugned the appointment of respondent No. 4 as well as the validity of the recommendation of the Medical Council making a distinction between clinical and iron-clinical subjects on account of its being discriminatory in prescribing medical qualification and excluding persons with non-medical qualifications.
(2.) The facts, briefly stated, are that the petitioner with non-medical qualification was appointed Professor of Ocular Pathology with effect from 1st January 1993 whereas the respondent No. 4 was appointed on 17th March 1985. On account of his seniority under the existing Ordinance, the petitioner being eligible was declared Chairman of the Department of Opthalmology on 10th December 1991. The term of the Chairman was to continue for a period of three years. But during the mid-term, by an order dated 16th July 1992, the petitioner's Chairmanship was declared to have been ceased and that the respondent No 4 was declared to have been appointed as Chairman of the Department on the ground that the responded. No. 4 was duly qualified for the post in terms of the amended Ordinance promulgated on 18th July 1992 with retrospective effect from 16th July 1992 in exercise of the emergency power of the Vice-Chancellor under Section 19 (3) of the AMU Act.
(3.) Admittedly the respondent No. 4 has in the mean time ceased to be the Chairman of the Department on account of the completion of his term and a new incumbent has been declared Chairman of the Department. The petitioner has neither amended the writ petition nor added the new incumbent as respondent in the present writ petition.;