ASHOK KUMAR MATHUR,J. - (1.) THE petitioner by this writ petition has prayed that the order Annexure -1 dated 23 -1 -1982 may be quashed and the respondents may be directed not to proceed according to order Annexure -1 by way of making any recovery from salary or provident fund of the petitioner of the amount paid in excess of subsistence allowance to the petitioner.
(2.) THE petitioner was initially appointed as Lecturer in the Rajasthan College of Agriculture, Udaipur, in the year 1958 and on the establishment of the respondent University in the year 1962 his services were placed at the disposal of the respondent University. The petitioner was temporarily appointed as Associate Professor on 6th July, 1966. Thereafter he was appointed to the post of Geneticist on substantive basis vide order dated 6th July, 1966. The petitioner further submits that because of his active participation in the Teachers Association he came in conflict with the authorities and at the time of Dr. P.S. Lamba as Vice Chancellor a disciplinary enquiry was initiated against the petitioner. Apprehending that the petitioner is likely to be put under suspension he proceeded to file writ petition which came to be registered as S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 2315 of 1974. This writ petition was admitted on 1st October, 1974 and the following order was passed on the stay application: The order of suspension of the petitioner is stayed only in respect of payment of emoluments to him during the suspension period. The petitioner shall be paid his full pay and all other allowances on the condition that the petitioner shall furnish adequate security to the satisfaction of the Registrar, University of Udaipur, for the repayment of the difference between the normal emoluments payable to the petitioner and the subsistence allowance which would have been payable to him in accordance with the suspension order in case the writ petition fails. However, it is made clear that the excess amount over and above the subsistance allowance which shall thus be paid to the petitioner in pursuance of this order shall be liable to adjustment against the provident fund of the petitioner with University in case the writ petition is dismissed. Thereafter when Dr. P.S. Lamba demitted office of the Vice Chancellor Shri Ranvir Singh took over, he revoked the suspension and reinstated him on 25th August, 1977. It is further submitted that Shri Ranvir Singh advised the petitioner to withdraw the writ petition, so that a congenial atmosphere may be created. On this desire by the Vice Chancellor Ranvir Singh, the petitioner withdrew the writ petition. On the application filed by the petitioner this Court passed the following order: Mr. Mridul states that the writ petition has become infructuous as relief has already been granted to the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as not pressed. Costs made easy.
(3.) THE Hoard of Control of the respondent University vide its Resolution No. 25 dated 2nd August, 1980 resolved to drop the enquiry pending against the petitioner and sent a copy to the Chancellor vide letter dated 4th August, 1980. This Resolution of the Board of Control of the respondent University was subsequently confirmed in the next meeting of the Board of Control. It was resolved in the Resolution that he was also called upon to give undertaking to the effect that he shall not take recourse to any law court for damages etc. Meanwhile the petitioner was promoted to the cost of Professor and Head of Geneticist and Plant Breeding vide order dated 22nd April. 1980. Thereafter Mr. P.N. Bhandari took over as the Vice Chancellor of the University of Udaipur. The Executive Committee of the respondent University in its meeting held on 3 -12 -1981 resolved to stay the Resolution No. 25 of the Board of Control dated 2 -8 -1980 allegedly for the reasons that the: (i) mover of the proposal in the Board of Central, Dr. H.B. Tiwari was not a regular member of the Board of Control but was attending the meeting as an invitee ; (ii) The Chairman had no knowledge of these cases and wanted to consider the adoption of the resolution very carefully in order to avoid further complication ; and (iii) this item was neither on regular agenda nor in the perview of the Board of Control. ;