K.A. Swami, C.J.

When the Writ Appeal No. 1150 of 1995 preferred against an interim order in W.M.P. No.7923 of 1995 came up before us for consideration, we considered it necessary to hear the writ petition itself. Subsequently it was brought to our notice thai W.P. No.4586 of 1995 also relates to the same subject-matter. Therefore, we directed to post the said writ petition along with the writ appeal. Hence, all the three matters are posted together. We have heard both sides. The decision in the writ petitions will have a bearing upon the writ appeal. Therefore, we take up the writ petitions for consideration.

2. In W.P. No.4586 of 1995, the petitioner has sought for issue of a writ of quo warranto, calling upon the respondents to show under what authority, the respondents 3 and 4 are holding the office of the member of Senate/ Syndicate in spite of the judgment of the Division Bench in W.P. Nos.5025 and 5026 of 1992, dated 12. 1994. In W.P. No.4827 of 1995, the petitioner has sought for issue of a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 3 and 4 to forbear from participating in the Senate and Syndicate meetings of the Madurai Kamaraj University in view of Secs. 15(b