Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
D. N. JHA, R. C. DEO, KAMLESHWAR NATH
L.N.MATHUR - Appellant
Versus
CHANCELLOR, LUCKNOW UNIVERSITY - Respondents
W. P. 2615 Of 1979
Decided On : 11/30/1984
UP STATE UNIVERSITIES ACT, 1973 - SECTION 31(8)(A) - POWERS OF CHANCELLOR - QUASI-JUDICIAL - SPEAKING ORDER - NOT REQUIRED.
Fact of the Case:
The Chancellor of Lucknow University, acting under Section 31(8)(a) of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973, appointed Dr. Avtar Singh as Reader in the Discipline of Law, superseding the recommendation of the Selection Committee, which had placed L.N. Mathur, the petitioner, in the first place. The petitioner challenged the Chancellor's order, arguing that the Chancellor's decision was quasi-judicial and, therefore, he was required to record reasons for his decision.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the Chancellor's powers under Section 31(8)(a) of the Act were not quasi-judicial and that he was not required to record reasons for his decision. The Court distinguished the present case from cases where the Chancellor was required to adjudicate upon a dispute between two parties, holding that in the present case, there was no lis before the Chancellor and that he was merely exercising his discretion to make an appointment.
Issues: Whether the Chancellor's powers under Section 31(8)(a) of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973, are quasi-judicial and whether he is required to record reasons for his decision.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the Chancellor's powers under Section 31(8)(a) of the Act were not quasi-judicial and that he was not required to record reasons for his decision. The Court reasoned that the Chancellor was not deciding a dispute between two parties, but was merely exercising his discretion to make an appointment. The Court also noted that the Act did not require the Chancellor to record reasons for his decision.
Final Decision: The Court held that the Chancellor's order was valid and dismissed the petitioner's challenge.
( 1 ) THIS reference has been made by a learned single Judge in view of the conflict of judicial opinion between two Division Bench decisions expressed in Dr. (Mrs.) Prabha Gupta v. Lucknow University, 1981 Lawyers Law Times (Services) 51 and Dr. U. N. Roy v. His Excellency, Sri G. D. Tapase (the Ex-Governor, State of Uttar Pradesh), Chancellor, Allahabad University, 1981 UPLBEC 309. In the former decision a Division Bench expressed a view that the decision of the Chancellor in regard to appointment of a teacher made under S. 31 (8) (a) of the U. P. State Universities Act, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act) is not of a quasi-judicial nature. In the case of Dr. U. N. Roy (supra) the Division Bench held that while exercising powers under S. 31 (8) (a) of the Act the Chancellor exercised quasi-judicial power. The learned single Judge, therefore, has made a reference to the larger Bench to decide as to whether powers exercisable by the Chancellor under S. 31 (8) (a) are quasi-judicial and he is required to state reasons for his decision or whether such an order is not a quasi-judicial order and it is not necessary to pass a speaking order.
( 2 ) THE facts of the case are that an advertisement had been made for the selection to the post of Reader in the Faculty of Law. Several persons had applied for the said post. A meeting of the Selection Committee duly constituted under the Act was held on 17-2-1979 and the Committee after considering the qualifications of the various applicants and after interview made the recommendation as under :-1. Sri. L. N. Mathur. 2. Sri Avtar Singh. 3. Sri V. S. Shukla. The matter came up in the meeting of the Executive Council held on 30-3-1979 which did not approve the recommendation of the Selection Committee in regard to appointment of Reader in Law and made a reference to the Chancellor under S. 31 (8) (a) of the Act. The reasons for disagreement are indicated in Annexure-4 to the petition. The order of the Chancellor was communicated vide letter dated 2-9-1979, Annexure 5 to the writ petition. It is apparent from this letter that the Chancellor had been pleased to accept the recommendation of the Executive Council and directed that Dr. Avtar Singh be appointed Reader in Law of the Lucknow University. The legality of this order has been questioned by Sri L. N. Mathur through this writ petition.
( 3 ) ON reference being made to the larger Bench for consideration of the question mentioned above we have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have also gone through the record. S. 31 of the Act deals with the appointment of teachers. The relevant portion of S. 31 is being reproduced hereunder for the sake of convenience : -"31 (8) (A ). In the case of appointment of a teacher of the University, if the Executive Council does not agree with the recommendation made by the Selection Committee, the Executive Council shall refer the matter to the Chancellor along with the reasons of such disagreement, and his decision shall be final : (Emphasis is mine)provided that if the Executive Council does not take a decision on the recommendations of the Selection Committee within a period of four months from the date of the meeting of such Committee, then also the matter shall stand referred to the Chancellor, and his decision shall be final. "
( 4 ) THE learned counsel for the respondents conceded that the powers exercised by the Chancellor under S. 68 are of quasi-judicial nature. S. 68 is being reproduced hereunder:-"68. If any question arises whether any person has been duly elected or appointed as, or is entitled to be, a member of any authority or other body of any authority or officer of the University including any question as to the validity of a Statute, Ordinance or Regulation, not being a Statute or Ordinance made or approved by the State Government or by the Chancellor or whether any decision of any authority or officer of the University is in conformity with this A
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
