S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.

On this writ petition, from time to time, orders have been made directing that it would be heard finally at Admission stage. Accordingly, we proceed to issue Rule and by consent of parties, all of whom are appearing through advocates and waive service, we dispose of this writ petition finally by this judgment.

2. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 24th February 2011 by which the Vice Chancellor of the 1st respondent-University has withdrawn and cancelled the approval to the appointment of the petitioner as a lecturer in Mass Communication in Central India Institute of Mass Communication administered by Institute of Educational Research and Development Affairs, Nagpur. It is also declared by this order that the petitioner shall cease to be a teacher within the meaning of section 2(34) of the Maharashtra University Act, 1994 (for short “M.U. Act”) from the date of this order.

3. The petitioner also challenges the communication dated 4th March 2011, by which the Principal of Central India Institute of Mass Communication has been intimated that the name of the petitioner as approved teacher in Mass Communication from the said college is deleted from the Electoral Roll of Board of Studies-Mass Communication, subject-Mass Communication in the faculty of Social Sciences.

4. Admittedly there were large scale irregularities and illegalities in the examinations held by the first respondent – University. At the relevant time serious allegations of forgery, in what was termed as “Marksheet and Revaluation Scam” were made against the petitioner and for his alleged criminal activities the petitioner was prosecuted in Criminal Case No. 372/2002 and charged with offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471, 120(B), 409 of Indian Penal Code. He came to be convicted and punished with imprisonment of 12 ½ years and fine of Rs. 50,000/-. This conviction and punishment was challenged by the petitioner by filing Criminal Appeal No.18/2007, but this Court by judgment and order dated 06.02.2009 set aside the conviction and sentence under Sections 468, 471 read with Section 34 and 109 of Indian Penal Code, but, maintained the one punishable under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced the petitioner to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period already undergone and to pay fine of Rs. 40,000/-. It is this conviction and sentence of a teacher like the petitioner which led to cancellation and withdrawal of an approval, which was adhoc, by the 3rd respondent vide the impugned order.

5. The facts which are necessary to appreciate the challenge to these orders are that the petitioner is a citizen of India and domiciled in Nagpur permanently. He has a Master's degree in Journalism. He was appointed by the respondent No.4-Society as a lecturer in the respondent No.5-Institute by an order dated 4th December 1998. The 1st respondent is the University of Nagpur and respondent Nos.2 and 3 are Chancellor and Vice Chancellor of this University respectively. Respondent No.3 was appointed as a Vice Chancellor in December 2010. Respondent Nos.4 and 5 are a Society and a College, respectively, viz., college of Media Education and Fashion Technology, which is affiliated to the 1st respondent-University.

6. The petitioner states that he was selected by a duly constituted Selection Committee and appointed as a lecturer in Mass Communication. The petitioner himself refers to the Statutes that have been framed under the then Nagpur University Act, 1974. By the Statutes, saved by the Maharashtra University Act (Successor Legislation), there is a provision in Appendix I which refers to constitution of Selection Committee and its recommendation. The petitioner submits that upon his selection in terms of a recommendation of the Selection Committee, the papers were submitted for approval of the then Vice Chancellor of respondent No.1. The respondent