Shiv Kumar Sharma, J. - (1.) The petitioner seeks to quash the order dated January 29, 2000 (Annexure-8) and Feb. 9, 2000 (Annexure-9) whereby the respondent No.2 Dr. Satish Agarwal was appointed as Dean Faculty of Management Studies and the petitioner was ordered not to function as Director, School of Business. The petitioner also seeks directions to reinstate him on the post of Dean, Faculty of Management Studies as well as on the post of Director of the said faculty.
(2.) According to the facts averred in the writ petition the petitioner passed M.Com. Examination in the year 1966, he stood first in the entire University and was awarded Gold Medal. Thereafter degree of Ph.D. was conferred on him. Initially the petitioner came to be appointed as Lecturer in Rajasthan Education Service on July 7, 1966 and afterwards selected on the post of Reader in Faculty of Commerce Management in Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel University Gujarat on August 1, 1977. On June 15, 1979 he was selected and appointed on the post of Professor in Saurashtra University. While the petitioner was working as professor, he was deputed by the University Grant Commission to Maharshi Dayanand Saraswati University, Ajmer on June 1, 1995. During that period he was selected on the post of Professor vide order dated December 6, 1995. On December 6, 1996 he was confirmed on the said post. While the petitioner was working as Professor he was also appointed as Director Faculty of Management Studies vide order dated December 21, 1995. In accordance with the provisions contained in the a University of Ajmer Act 1987 (in short 1987 Act) the petitioner was appointed as Dear for Faculty of Management Studies. Although in the order the petitioner was appointed for period of two years but the said period was extended for further two years vide order dated December 27, 1997. On October 29, 1993 a decision was taken for appointment of Director of each School of Studies for a period of three years. On June 25, 1991 a meeting of Academic Council was held for the purpose of post of Dean and a decision was taken which was incorporated in item No.10, which reads thus "10. The Item No.10 of the Agenda was considered and it was resolved to appoint Deans on the basis of seniority amongst the following : (i) (a) Seniority amongst Professors of the University OR (b) Seniority amongst P.G. Principals of affiliated Colleges. (ii) Seniority amongst, the Readers, where there is no Professor in the Faculty. It was further RESOLVED that the Deans be appointed by rotation. As soon as the faculties would be established the rotation system will come into force."
(3.) According to the petitioner there is no other Professor except the petitioner in the entire Faculty of Management Studies. The respondent No.2 is merely an Associate Professor with total 10 years teaching experience, whereas the petitioner has experience of 34 years teaching out of which 21 years is as professor. The impugned order dated January 29, 2000 and Feb. 9, 2000, according to the petitioner, are contrary to law and facts on record. The petitioner is the .only Professor in the Faculty of Management Studies and he cannot be compelled to work under the Associate Professor. The appointment of respondent No.2 on the post of Dean is illegal and contrary to 1987 Act. The petitioner submitted representations to the Vice Chancellor on February 23, 2000 and to the Chancellor on March 3, 2000 but no heed was paid to the request made by the petitioner. Therefore the petitioner has o prayed to quash the impugned orders and sought directions to reinstate the petitioner on the post of Dean, Faculty of Management Studies as well as on the post of Director, Faculty of Management Studies.;