By the Court.—The appointment of the Principal of Prayag Mahila Vidyapeeth Degree College, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the ‘College’) which is affiliated to the Chhatrapati Shahuji Maharaj University, Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as the ‘University’) is the core issue involved in all these petitions and, therefore, they have been heard together.

2. The order dated 27th February, 2004 passed by the Vice-Chancellor of University and the order dated 9th June, 2004 passed by the Chancellor of the University have been impugned in Writ Petition No. 76322 of 2005 and Writ Petition No. 46551 of 2004 which have been filed by Dr. (Smt.) Shakti Pandey (hereinafter referred to as ‘Dr. Pandey’) and the Committee of Management of the College respectively. The Vice-Chancellor of the University by the order dated 27th February, 2004 accepted the claim of Dr. (Smt.) Rajni Tripathi (hereinafter referred to as ‘Dr. Tripathi’) that she had withdrawn her resignation on 28th September, 2003 prior to its acceptance and, therefore, directed the Management of the College to forthwith handover the charge of the Principal of the College to her. The Chancellor of the University by the order dated 9th June, 2004 rejected the representations filed by the Committee of Management of the College as well as Dr. Pandey under Section 68 of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘University Act’) for quashing the aforesaid order passed by the Vice-Chancellor of the University. Writ Petition No. 46933 of 2004 has been filed by Dr. Tripathi for a direction upon the respondents to ensure the compliance of the aforesaid orders passed by the Vice-Chancellor and Chancellor of the University.

3. An advertisement No. 25 was issued by the U.P. Higher Education Services Commission, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Commission’) for selection of the Principals of a number of Degree Colleges including the aforesaid College under the provisions of the U.P. Higher Education Service Commission Act, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Commission Act’). Dr. Pandey and Dr. Tripathi along with a number of other candidates submitted applications for appointment as Principal of the Degree Colleges and thereafter the Commission sent the list dated 18th April, 2001 to the Director of Education (Higher Education) (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Director’) by the letter dated 30th April, 2001 recommending the names of candidates found to be most suitable in order of merit. The Director, by the communication dated 31st August, 2002, recommended the name of Dr. Tripathi as the Principal of the College under Section 13(3) of the Commission Act and thereafter Dr. Tripathi joined the College on 2nd September, 2002. On 27th September, 2003 at about 7.30 PM a resignation letter was submitted by Dr. Tripathi to the Committee of Management. It was mentioned that she was submitting the resignation letter after accepting the decision taken that day by the Committee of Management and that she wanted to proceed to her home district.

4. There is a serious dispute about the facts subsequent to the submission of the aforesaid resignation letter on 27th September, 2003. The case of Dr. Tripathi is that she submitted a letter to the Manager of the Committee of Management of the College on 28th September, 2006 for withdrawal of the resignation letter, while the case of the Committee of Management of the College is that no such letter was submitted by her for withdrawal of the resignation and that the Committee of Management in its meeting held on 11th October, 2003 also accepted the resignation submitted by her. The Director thereafter by the communication dated 18th November, 2003 recommended the name of Dr. Pandey from the list sent by the Commission on 30th April, 2001 for appointment as the Principal of the College against the vacancy that had arisen in the College on account of the resignation submitted by Dr. Tripathi. On the basis of the s