By the Court.—Heard Sri Nipun Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Vivek Varma, learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 2 and Sri Ashok Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the respondent No. 3.

2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner, i.e. college, under which the respondent No. 3 was employed as lecturer on contract basis under the self-finance scheme, has challenged the judgment of the Vice-Chancellor, Mahatma Jyotiba Phule, Rohil Khand University, whereby he has declined to accord approval for removal of the respondent No. 3 from service and has disapproved such action of the petitioner.

3. The undisputed facts are that the contractual appointments of lecturers are made under the self-finance scheme in accordance with the Government Orders issued from time to time and their terms and conditions of service are also regulated by the said Government Orders. Such appointments are not made under the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 nor the conditions of service are governed thereunder. The respondent No. 3 was appointed as lecturer on contract basis under the self-finance scheme by the petitioner on 31.10.2010 in the department of eduction after due and p