Ravi S. Dhavan, J.

1. This matter before the Court is on an issue by which the U. P. Higher Education Services Commission has taken the imitative to unilaterally terminate the instructions of its counsel Mr. Vinod Misra, Advocate, Counsel hitherto has appeared as the Standing Counsel for the Commission. That, counsel's instructions had been unilaterally terminated, is a matter of record in a letter of the Commission dated 29-9-1988 bearing No. U Shi. Ayog 274-76/88-89

2. A copy of this letter was endorsed (a) to a counsel who was to act and plead for the Commission henceforth and, (b) to the Registrar, High Court for information. The purpose of making endorsements to the persons, aforesaid, in this letter of the Commission was deliberate. It was a formal intimation to it's standing counsel that he was not to act on behalf of the Commission. It was also an intimation to the counsel who succeeded him that hence forth he was to act. Further, it was a formal announcement to the Registrar, High Court of the change which had been brought about by the Commission in changing its counsel. The letter, at the end of it. expresses appreciation and thanks to Mr. Vinod Misra, Advocate for having, the commission's Standing Counsel, for having discharged his services as a counsel, to the satisfaction of the Commission. It would be appropriate, in matters like this, that the contents of this letter are reproduced :

"Mahoday, U. P. Uchhattar Shiksha Sewa Aayog, Allahabad ke Nirnyanusar Aayog ke virudh dayar Mukadmon ki pairvi ke liye teen warsh poorva aap ki niyukti ke gayi thi. Ab Aayog dwara lambit mukadmon kl samiksha ke baad haai me liye gaye nirnay ko anusaar muzhe aap ko suchit karne ka nirdesh huwa hai ki Sri Vijai Bahadur Singh, Adhivakta. Uchcha Nyayalaya Allahabad ko Dinank 1st. October 1988 se Aayog ke vlrudh; daayar sabhi mukadmon ki pairvi ke liye Adhivakta niyukt kiya jata hai. Ataheve aap se anurodh hai ki aap ki ore se ya uske vlrudh daayar wadon ki sampoorn filen Sri Vijay Bahadur Singh, Adhivakta ko hastaantarit karne ke liye Sri Bhola Prasad Ojha,, varishta sahayak ka avilamba suchl sahit uplabdha karaneyki kripa karen.. Aap ke jitney bhi bill bakaava hon unki soochi yathashigra Aayog ko bhijwane ka kashta karen taakl satyapan kar sbigra bhugtaan kiya ja sakay. Aayog aap dwara kt gayi sewayon evam sahyog ke liya aabhari hai."

Bhavdiya Sd =D. N. Ray Sachiv

When the letter of the Commission was first brought to the notice of the Court by counsel who had acted and pleaded for the Commission i.e. Mr. Vinod Misra. Advocate, he had sought a discharge from the court on the ground that his client having unilaterally terminated his instructions, as a self respecting counsel, it may not be appropriate for him to plead on behalf of a client who did not desire to retain him. He drew the attention of the Court to the general principles and the settled law on this subject, as laid down by the Courts on order III Rule IV of the Code of Civil Procedure Thus, this Court on 28-2-1989 passed the following order :-

"This is an application by learned counsel Mr. Vinod Mishra who had hitherto appeared on behalf of U. P. Higher Education Services Commission. Learned counsel, aforesaid, had brought on record a letter written by the Commission to counsel that hence forth in the oases of the Commission pending and future, his instructions to appear are being terminated. The Commission engaged another counsel Mr V. B. Singh, Advocate. A copy of this letter has been endorsed to the Registrar, High Court for the purpose of information and also to counsel who has now put in appearance. The intimation to the High Court Is for no other purpose than Intimating the Court tint Mr. Vinod Mishra, henceforth, does not have Instructions to plead. The Intimation of the Commission is virtnally an application to terminate Counsel's Instructions. This can only permitted by the Court, in effect, under the principles underlying Order III Rule IV of the Code of Civ