M.Y. Eqbal, J. - (1.) SINCE both these appeals arose out of the judgment passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (S) No. 767 of 2004, they have been heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.
(2.) L .P.A. No. 574 of 2006 has been filed by respondent No. 3 of the writ petition, namely, Dr. Leela Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'the appellant') while L.P.A. No. 623 of 2006 has been filed by Vinoba Bhave University (hereinafter referred to as 'the University'). By the impugned judgment, the learned Single judge quashed the order dated 7.1.2004 passed by the University and declared respondent No. 1 - Ram Sharan Nishad (hereinafter referred to as 'the writ petitioner') senior to the appellant, Dr. Leela Singh. The facts of the case lie in a narrow compass: Respondent No. 1 - Ram Sharan Nishad (hereinafter referred to as 'the writ petitioner') was appointed on 6.11.1979 as Lecturer of Psychology in J.M. College, Ramgarh, Hazaribagh (in short 'the College'). According to the writ petitioner, the said college was a private college governed by the Managing Committee and his appointment was made after due advertisement and interview by the Governing Body of the College which was affiliated with the Ranchi University. In the year 1987, 15 posts were sanctioned by the Education Department of the State of Bihar in various disciplines including Psychology. In 1989, by advertisement No. 803 of 1989, applications were invited for post of Lecturers in Psychology on regular basis. By another advertisement No. 800 of 1989, applications were invited for the post of Lecturer in the discipline of Political Science. The appellant applied for the post of Lecturer in Political Science and the writ petitioner applied for the post of Lecturer in the discipline of Psychology pursuant to the said advertisement. Thereafter, the Bihar College Service Commission conducted selection process and made recommendations. By letter dated 19th November, 1994, the Commission recommended the case of the appellant for appointment on the post of Lecturer in Political Science. Consequently, appointment letter was issued on 12th November, 1995 and the appellant joined her post on 14th November, 1995. However, after 4 years, the Commission recommended the name of the writ petitioner for appointment of Lecturers in the discipline of Psychology vide letter dated 16.9.1998. Consequently, letter of appointment was issued by the College on 8th February, 1999 for appointment of the writ petitioner. However, in the said letter, the appointment of the writ petitioner was made effective from the date of his initial appointment.
(3.) DISPUTE arose between the writ petitioner and the appellant in 2001 when the post of Principal fell vacant in the said College. The Managing Committee was asked by the University vide letter dated 5.7.2000 to relieve the Principal on retirement and to appoint the seniormost teacher of the College as Incharge Principal with immediate effect. In compliance of the said letter, the Secretary of the Managing Committee of the College appointed the appellant as Incharge Principal till further order vide letter dated 30th July, 2001. Against the said appointment of the appellant as Incharge Principal, the writ petitioner made representation to the Registrar of the University on 24th August 2001. When the representation was not considered, the writ petitioner filed a writ petition being W.P.S. No. 1507 of 2002 which was disposed of vide order dated 16th July, 2003 with a direction to the Vice Chancellor of the University to consider the claim of the writ petitioner and the appellant and to take a decision as to who is entitled to the post of Incharge Principal on the basis of the seniority. In compliance of the aforesaid direction, the Vice Chancellor of the University vide order dated 7.1.2004 declared the appellant as senior to the writ petitioner on the ground that appointment of the appellant was earlier than that of the writ petitioner.;