Special appeal maintainable against implied refusal of interim stay affecting vital rights; family relationship between managers irrelevant if absent from show cause/audit/appointment grounds; remand for merits-based stay decision.

JUDGMENT :

1. Heard Shri Gajendra Pratap, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri Vinay Kumar Singh, Advocate for the appellants, learned Standing Counsel for respondents no. 1, 2, 3 and 4, Shri Aditya Kumar Singh, learned counsel for respondents no. 5 and 6 and Shri G.K. Singh, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Shri Rishabh Narayan Singh, Advocate for respondent no. 7.

2. An application seeking impleadment has been filed on behalf of one Vijay Bahadur Singh claiming himself to be life member of Bayalsi Shaikhsanik Samiti, Jalalpur, District Jaunpur, stating therein that he had filed a caveat application in the writ petition giving rise to the present special appeal and though he was not impleaded as a party therein, he was heard by the learned Single Judge and, therefore, he may be impleaded in this appeal. Certain other facts have also been stated in the affidavit.

3. We find that the learned Single Judge has not yet allowed the application for impleadment and, in first paragraph of the order impugned before us, after noticing opposition made on behalf of the petitioners to the impleadment, time to file response against the said application has been granted to the petitioner side. This Court, therefore, is not inclined to allow the said application in the present special appeal and the question of impleadment of applicant Vijay Bahadur Singh is left open to be considered by the learned Single Judge in the pending writ petition.

4. The instant appeal raises a challenge to an order dated 26.11.2025, whereby learned Single Judge, after noticing the submissions made on behalf of respective parties as well as learned counsel for the applicant seeking impleadment, has granted time to the parties to exchange affidavits in the matter and directed listing of the matter on 19.12.2025 amongst top ten cases.

5. The writ petition was filed by the appellants challenging an order dated 10.11.2025, whereby the State Government had appointed Regional Higher Education Officer, Varanasi as Authorised Controller in the institution for a period of one year in purported exercise of powers under Section 58 (1) of U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 ('the Act, 1973').

6. Before the learned Single Judge, placing reliance on a judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of U.P. and others Vs. Committee of Management of S.K.M. Inter College and another : 1995 Supp (2) SCC 535, arguments were advanced on behalf of the Principal of the institution, i.e. respondent no. 7 and also the party seeking impleadment that the erstwhile Manager and the petitioner no. 2, who is presently the Manager of the institution, are husband and wife and, therefore, in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court, the order impugned suffers from no infirmity.

7. Learned Single Judge has passed the following order dated 26.11.2025, which is impugned in the present appeal:-

"1. Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Ramesh Chandra Tiwari, learned counsel has moved an impleadment application to which Sri O.P. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Vinay Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner has an objection and states to file his response within a week.

2. Sri G.K. Singh, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri H.P. Shahi and Sri Sankalp Narain, learned counsel has appeared for the respondent no.7 and Sri Aditya Kumar Singh, learned counsel has appeared for r