JUDGMENT :

1. The short question that arises for our consideration in this appeal is whether an order of termination of service of a Principal of a College affiliated or associated to the University governed by the provisions of U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 (1973 Act), during or on expiry of the period of probation, could take effect without the approval of the Vice-Chancellor of the University concerned.

2. The factual matrix in the context of which the above issue arises is as follows: Kanohar Lal Post Graduate Girls College, Sharda Road, Brahampuri, Meerut (hereinafter referred to as ‘the College’) is affiliated to Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut (hereinafter referred to as ‘the University’). As the post of Principal in the College was lying vacant, a requisition was sent to the Higher Education Services Commission (for short ‘the Commission’) to recommend a candidate for filling up the post. Pursuant thereto, the Director of Higher Education recommended fifth respondent for appointment on the post. In pursuance thereof, letter of appointment was issued on 22.10.2021 appointing fifth respondent as Principal of the College on probation of one year by stipulating that her service shall be subject to the service conditions prescribed by the University. On strength of the letter of appointment, the fifth respondent joined her duties as Principal of the College on 23.10.2021. On 16.10.2022, the Management of the College (the appellants herein) resolved that services of the fifth respondent would neither be confirmed nor the period of probation shall be extended on expiry of probation period of one year. Consequent to this resolution, by letter dated 21.10.2022, the appellant informed the fifth respondent that her services are not confirmed and they shall stand terminated on expiry of probation period. Against termination of her service, the fifth respondent represented to the University. The In-charge Vice-Chancellor of the University, through its letter / order dated 28.10.2022, directed that the effect and operation of the termination letter dated 21.10.2022 shall remain stayed as prior to issuance of the termination letter the matter was not reported to the University and no approval was sought as is required by section 35 (2) of the 1973 Act. Accordingly, by the said letter, the management of the College was invited to explain the circumstances in which the termination letter was issued. It is this letter/order dated 28.10.2022 which was impugned in Writ A No. 19736 of 2022 filed by the appellants before the learned Single Judge.

3. Before the learned Single Judge, on behalf of the appellants, it was argued that the Vice-Chancellor is not vested with power to stay the effect and operation of the resolution, or the consequential order of termination, passed by the Committee of Management and, therefore, the order is void. Whereas, on behalf of fifth respondent it was argued that by virtue of Section 35 (2) of the 1973 Act, there could be no dispensation of service without the prior approval of the Vice-Chancellor therefore, the order terminating the services, without prior approval, was void. Thus, the order of the Vice-Chancellor impugned in the writ petition required no interference.

4. By impugned judgment and order dated 29.11.2022, the learned single Judge disposed off Writ A No. 19736 of 2022 by observing that there is no patent error in the order of the In-charge Vice-Chancellor. However, a direction was issued that if the writ petitioner files an objection to the proceedings pending before the Vice-Chancellor, the Vice-Chancellor shall proceed to pass an appropriate reasoned order, in accordance with law, within a specified period, after hearing both sides.

5. Aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge dated 29.11.2022, the Management of the College (i.e. the writ petitioner) has filed this intra court appeal.

6. We have heard Sri Shailendra, learned senior counsel, assisted by Sri Subhanshu and Sri A