S.C. Mathur, J. - (1.) The dispute in these petitions pertains to appointment to the post of Lecturer in Sociology on ad hoc basis in Shashi Bhushan Balika Vidyalaya Degree College, Lucknow. Writ Petition No. 9 of 1987 has been filed by the Managing Committee of the College whereas Writ Petition No. 451 of 1987 has been filed by Kumari Madhu Chauhan who had been appointed to the post in question by the Committee of Management. The Management has impugned the order, dated 24th December, 1986, Annexure-1, passed by the Vice-Chancellor, Lucknow. University, Lucknow, opposite party No. 1, whereby he has directed the Management to honour the recommendations of the Selection Committee and appoint Smt. Raj Kumari Bajpai, opposite party No. 2, to the said post. The dispute has arisen in the circumstances hereinafter indicated.
(2.) Admittedly the post in question fell vacant on account of the death of the permanent incumbent of the post. The post was advertised and the candidates were interviewed on 15th November, 1986 by the Selection Committee comprising the Manager, the Principal of the College, nominee of the Principal and an expert nominated by the Vice-Chancellor. The Selection Committee, by majority, recommended Smt. Raj Kumari Bajpai for appointment to the post. According to the petitioner the Manager of the College who was Chairman of the Selection Committee, did not agree with the recommendation and put her note of dissent. The Management's claim is that Smt. Raj Kumari Bajpai did not fulfil the requisite prescribed qualifications for appointment to the post and as against her Kumari Madhu Chauhan was fit person to be appointed. It is claimed that the recommendations of the Selection Committee were placed before Managing Committee on 16th November, 1986 and the Managing Committee also did not agree with the recommendations of the Selection Committee. It is stated that the matter was again considered by the Managing Committee at its meeting held on 26th November, 1986 and it was resolved that Kumari Madhu Chauhan be appointed to the post on ad hoc basis. The Management claims that in pursuance of this resolution appointment order was issued to Kumari Madhu Chauhan on 4th December, 1986. The management's claim is that this selection and appointment was made after the vacancy had been notified to the Higher Education Services Committee in the first week of September, 1986 and the Commission had failed to select and recommend any candidate. It appears that the Management itself sent the paper to the Vice-Chancellor, Lucknow University, Lucknow, who thereafter passed the impugned order.
(3.) The Management's present claim is that the matter of ad hoc appointment is covered by Section 16 (1) of the U.P. Higher Education Services Commission Act, 1980 under which the Vice-Chancellor has no role to play and the decision of the Management is final. On this basis it is asserted that the Vice-Chancellor's direction contained in the order, dated 24th December, 1986 is without jurisdiction and the appointment made by the Management in favour of Kumari Madhu Chauhan deserves to be maintained.;