D.S. Tewatia, J. - (1.) IN the two writ petitions Nos. 4751 and 5084 of 1975, common question of law and facts are involved and, therefore, a common order is proposed to dispose them of.
(2.) SINCE the material facts are identical in the two writ petitions, the facts alleged in Civil Writ No. 4751 of 1975 would suffice to be noticed. The facts alleged can be stated thus: A society registered as the Haryana Rural Education Society, Kaithal (Respondent No. 6), hereinafter referred to as the Society, runs and manages, apart from one Jat High School at Kaithal, another institution known as the Rural College of Education at Kaithal, hereinafter referred to as the College. The aforesaid College was affiliated to Kurukshetra University and at the relevant time, one Shri B. D. Shaida, Respondent No. 4, was the principal thereof. The facts further are that for the academic year 1975 -76 applications were invited for admission to the B. Ed. course in the aforesaid College and the Managing Committee of the College published the prospectus, a copy whereof is attached with the writ petition as annexure P. 1? which contained the qualification for admission and other relevant information besides the application form; that besides the prospectus the admission to B. Ed. courses conducted in various colleges including the College in question run by the Society (Respondent No. 6) and the date of the interview were also got published in the newspaper by the Registrar of the Kurukshetra University; that in the aforesaid prospectus, annexure P. 1, minimum qualification for admission was indicated to be graduates in arts, science, agriculture and commerce, and candidates not having secured less than 45 per cent marks, and in case of scheduled castes and other prescribed categories not less than 40 per cent marks, were eligible for admission; that total seats fixed for B. Ed. course were 95; that the Petitioners, like many others, applied for admission to the aforesaid College; that the College issued, after scrutinising their admission forms, interview cards (two such interview cards are annexed to the writ petition as annexures P. 2 and P. 3); that the Petitioners and such other students, to whom the interview cards had been issued, were required to appear for interview before a Selection Committee presided over by the Principal, Respondent No. 4, at 8.00 a.m. on 28th July, 1975; that the Petitioners along with some other students appeared before the Selection Committee on 28th July, 1975 at the scheduled time and after the interview a list, annexure P. 4, of selected candidates, which bore the names of the Petitioners, were displayed at the notice board; and that the Principal, Respondent No. 4, on the said list had, however, appended the following note: In view of the crisis created by the local administration, it has been decided to select candidates purely on the basis of the marks obtained by them in their M.A./M. Sc. and B.A./B. Sc. examinations. The final list is on the notice board and its copies may be seen with the Head Clerk and Accountant of the College. 1 to 95 candidates must deposit their dues within 3 days; failure to do so will entitle the candidates on the waiting list to be admitted in the next 2 days. Regular classes will start with effect from 4th August, 1975. That, in pursuance of the directions for deposit of fees within three days of the selection, the Petitioners along with others deposited the college dues with the College authorities and they were issued receipts, original whereof are annexed to the writ petition as annexures P. 5 to P. 12; that the Petitioners were qualified in all respects and no student having marks better than the Petitioners was rejected out of the candidates, who had applied to the College authorities for admission in time; that on 4th August, 1975, the opening day of College., when the Petitioners went to attend their classes in the College they were barred to attend the same by one Shri S. S. Bali, Respondent No. 2, who claimed himself to be the incharge of the College: that to the protest of the Petitioners and others that they had paid their College dues and were thus entitled to attend their classes, Shri Bali stated that he was not bound by the receipts issued by the office during the period he was not the Principal; that when they requested Shri Bali, that they be allowed to see Shri B. D. Shaida, the Principal of the College, they were informed that neither Shri Shaida nor they would be permitted to enter the College and if they created any fuss they would be made over to the police which were already posted outside the College; that when the Petitioners and other students persisted they were informed by Shri Bali that only such of them would be admitted to the classes as would have the permission of the Sub -Divisional Officer (Civil), Kaithal; that when the Petitioners sought an interview with the Sub -Divisional Officer (Civil), the latter declined to meet them and instead got it conveyed to them that they would approach the Civil Court for redress of their grievances; and this led the Petitioners to invoke the writ jurisdiction of this Court for redress of their grievances against the action of the Respondents, which they have termed as illegal, unwarranted, unjust, unconstitutional and uncalled for, in not allowing the Petitioners to attend the College in question, inter -alia, on the ground (1) that they were duly selected by the Select Committee in accordance with the rules and regulations as well as conditions contained in the prospectus, annexure P. 1, issued by the College, and (2) that their selection for admission could not be cancelled by the Respondents without hearing them when even the College dues had been got deposited from them by the College and they had been selected purely on merits.
(3.) FIVE out of six Respondents have filed their separate affidavits in reply to the allegations contained in the writ petition. On behalf of Respondent No. 1, the affidavit is sworn to by the Registrar, Shri R. -D. Sharma, and the stand take therein is that the University received complaint in regard to the admissions made in the year, 1974 to the College in question to the effect that the College authorities had taken bribes from the students, who had been admitted thereto, in the garb of donations for the College; that an Inspector of Colleges deputed by the Vice -Chancellor for making enquiries in the allegations, vide his report, annexure R. 1, confirmed the said allegations and so in order to prevent such corrupt practices, the Respondent University issued instructions to all Colleges of Education, wherein procedure was laid down regarding admissions; that on 8th July, 1975, the Vice -Chancellor of the Respondent University received various telephone calls from Kaithal complaining that the College in question was not issuing any application -form unless money was paid in advance whereupon the Vice -Chancellor deputed Professor Dool Singh, Dean, Faculty of Commerce and Head of the Department of Commerce and Management, Kurukshetra University, to investigate the complaint and report, that Prof. Dool Singh, vide report, annexure R. 2, reported that Shri M. S. Dhul, President of the College, stated to him that the College was meant for rural people and that not a single seat would be given to a candidate residing in an urban area; that when he asked the Incharge of the Office for an application form for admission, he was told that the same would be given on 12th July, 1975, although the last date of submission of the applications was 10th July, 1975; that on receiving the said report of Professor Dool Singh, the Respondent University issued orders, dated 8th July, 1975, copy annexure R. 3, asking Shri M. S. Dhul, President of the College, to stop all admissions and forward all applications received by the Managing Committee of the College to the University and by the same order extended the date of submission of the application -forms to 22nd July, 1975; that on 21st July, 1975, a D.O. letter, copy annexure R. 4, was received by the Vice -Chancellor from Shri S. A. Khan, Superintendent of Police, Kurukshetra, stating therein that Shri M. S. Dhul, aforesaid and other members of the staff of the said College were making deliberate attempt to demand money for admission to B. Ed, classes and that he had been accepting money in the shape of donations and had been harassing the prospective candidates for admission to B. Ed, classes and Shri S. A. Khan also indicated in his D.O. letter, that he was initiating legal action against Shri M. S. Dhul and others; that Shri Dhul neither sent any reply to the order, annexure R. 3, nor complied therewith which necessitated a second letter, dated 22nd July, 1975, annexure R. 5, by a registered post which was received back with the report 'knowingly refused'; while in the mean time the University was flooded with complaints that the application -forms were not being supplied by the College to the prospective candidates for admission - -one such complaint being annexure R. 6; that this conduct of the College authorities necessitated the extension of the last date of submission of the admission forms by the University to 30th July, 1975 and a telegram to that effect was also sent to the College authorities on 24th July, 1975, annexure R. 7, which was again received back with the remark 'knowingly refused'; that this non -co -operative attitude of the College authorities led the University to depute Shri I. S. Dahiya, Assistant Registrar, to go to Kaithal and notify to all concerned; that the date of submitting the application -forms was extended up to 30th July, 1975 and that the forms be obtained either from the office of the Principal of the College or from the University; that a copy of such a notice was personally pasted by him at prominent places in the College including the notice -board (copy annexure R. 8) and thereafter notice, annexure R. 9, to that effect was also published in the press - -one such notice was published in the Tribune and Vir Pratap in the issue of 27th July, 1975; that on 26th July, 1975, Shri Tara Chand Gupta, dealing Assistant, was deputed by the answering Respondent to go to Kaithal and collect admission forms from the Principal of the College who, on reaching there, found the College premises locked; that on 29th July, 1975, the Respondent University received another D.O. letter, annexure R. 10, from Shri S. A. Khan, Superintendent of Police, Kurukshetra, wherein it was stated that Shri M. S. Dhul, along with other members had been committing extortion and dishonestly inducing the delivery of huge amounts from Rs. 2,000 to Rs. 5,000 in his favour; that the members of the management of the College were divided in regard to the distribution of money received by him in that illegal manner which carried the potentiality of creating unrest among student community and thus had serious repercussions in regard to law and order which required him to take preventive action; that Shri Khan, felt that preventive action was not sufficient and so he suggested that S.D.O. (Civil), Kaithal, be asked to run the College and a suitable person be deputed by the University for his assistance; that on the aforesaid suggestion of Shri Khan, Shri S. S. Bali, (Respondent No. 2) was sent to Kaithal to act as the Principal of the College and finalise admissions thereto; that one Dr. Y. P. Aggarwal, Reader in "Department of Education, Kurukshetra, was nominated as the University nominee on the Selection Committee and the District Magistrate was informed by the letter, annexure R. 11, to that effect; that Shri R. C. Gupta, an Assistant, had, with the permission of the S.D.O. (Civil), Kaithal, put -up a notice, annexure R. 12, on the notice -board to the effect, that no interview would be held on the aforesaid date, i.e., 28th July, 1975 and, therefore, no interviews were held on 28th July, 1975; that on that date it had been notified by Respondent No. 2 (Shri S. S. Bali) that the interviews for selection would be held on 5th August, 1975; and that on the aforesaid date interviews were conducted by a Selection Committee consisting of Respondents Nos. 2 and 3. It has been further mentioned that Petitioner No. 1, who appeared for interview, was selected and was attending classes regularly; that Respondent No. 4, i.e., the ex -Principal Shri B. D. Shaida, sent two communications to the Respondent University, annexures R. 13 and R. 14, explaining therein the circumstances in which he was made to sign under duress a list showing the candidates -selected for admission without taking any interview; that although he tried to go to the S.D.O. (Civil) on receiving a telephone call from him, but he was prevented from doing so; and that after such a list had been signed by him he went to Narwana wherefrom he sent his letter of resignation to the University on 28th July, 1975.;