- (1.) TARUN Agarwala, J. Heard Sri Surya Kant, the learned Counsel for the applicant and Sri Amit Dwivedi, the learned Counsel for the opposite party No. 1.
(2.) THE applicant was a student of Master of Arts in Arab Culture in the University of Lucknow. THE Admission Committee of the University, by an or der, cancelled his admission in M. A. This led to the filing of Writ Petition No. 1595 (M/s) of 1994, which was allowed by a judgment dated 4. 10. 1994. THE Writ Court found that the basic principles of natural justice was not complied with by the University and accordingly quashed the order of expulsion. THE Writ Court passed the following operative order: "without going into the merits of other contentions raised on behalf of the petitioner, I am fully satisfied that the impugned order of expulsion is liable to be quashed as no opportunity was given to the petitioner and is in violation to the principles of natural justice. THE petition is liable to be al lowed on this ground alone. I accordingly quash the decision of the admission committee passed in the meeting held on 25. 7. 1994 communicated by letter dated 27. 7. 1994 can celling the petitioner's admission in M. A. Part-1 (Arab Culture) and debar ring him to take admission for three years. " It transpires that the University filed a Special Appeal No. 34 of 1995. An application for interim relief was also filed which was rejected by an order dated 9. 2. 1995. The order of the Appellate Court dated 9. 2. 1995 is quoted hereunder: ". . . . . . . . . . In the present case, prima facie, in our view, the material which was obtained behind of the back of the petitioner-respondent from Gorakhpur University and was taken into consideration while making the final decision should have been made known and available to the peti tioner-respondent so as to meet the least requirement of fair play. In view of this, prima-facie, as we have expressed, we do not find that any good ground is made out for staying the operation of the judgment of the learned Single Judge. The application for interim relief is, therefore, rejected. We would, however, like to clarify and provide that it would be open for the appellant, if it so chooses, to hold a fresh enquiry, in accordance to law. " It has come on record that the special appeal was subsequently dis missed for want of prosecution on 23. 9. 1999. It has also come on record that a special leave petition was preferred before the Supreme Court of India by the Lucknow University, which was also been dismissed as not pressed.
(3.) IT transpires that based on the interim order dated 9. 2. 1995, the University, through the Proctor, issued an order dated 22. 2. 1995 revoking the suspension of the applicant till the conclusion of a fresh enquiry. IT transpires that subsequently the applicant was again suspended on charges of forgery in the mark sheets and was issued a show-cause notice requiring him to show cause, as to why, he should not be expelled. The applicant challenged the show-cause notice by filing Writ Petition No. 384 (M/s) of 1995 which was eventually dismissed by a judgment dated 5. 4. 1995. The Writ Court held that the Proctor has the jurisdiction and the authority to pass an order of suspension. The Writ Court further directed the University authorities to conclude the dis ciplinary proceedings against the applicant. The operative portion of the order dated 5. 4. 1995 is quoted hereunder: "before parting with the case it will be in the interest of justice to di rect the University authorities to conclude disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner at the earliest possible so as to enable him to pursue his further studies in case the charges levelled against him are ultimately dropped. " From the record it transpires that pursuant to the notice dated 22. 2. 1995, the applicant asked for certain documents which is alleged to have been supplied. The applicant sought further time to file the reply and eventu ally, when no reply was submitted, the Vice-Chancellor issued an order dated 5. 10. 1996 reiteration the earlier order of expulsion dated 25. 7. 1994.;