C. P. SEN, B. C. VARMA, GULAB C. GUPTA, J.

( 1 ) ON a difference of opinion between the two learned Judges of the Division Bench, this petition has been referred to me to resolve the difference of opinion in this case. While B. C. Varma, J. is of the view that the petition should be allowed and the impugned orders Annexures C and E should be quashed rejecting the representation of the petitioner to include his name in the electoral roll of lecturers for electing their representative to the University Court, while according to Gulab Gupta, J. the petition ought to be dismissed firstly because it is an exercise in futility as the elections are over and no purpose can be served by now deciding this question and secondly the petitioner not being a Lecturer duly appointed as per requirements of law, he being an ad hoc lecturer or lecturer on probation, not entitled to be included in the voters' list. Only regular lecturers duly appointed can be included in the list.

( 2 ) RESPONDENT No. 1 Awadhesh Pratap Singh Vishwavidyalaya is a University constituted under M. P. Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973. The various authorities of the University have been enumerated in section 19 including the 'court'. Under section 20 the Court shall consist of the persons enumerated in Groups A to E. Group B pertains to representatives of Principals, Professors, Readers and Lecturers. So far as present case is concerned, under Rule 20 (1) (xiv), 14 persons are to be elected by the Lecturers to the Court. Under section 4 (xx) 'teachers of the University' means Professors, Readers, Lecturers and such other persons as may be appointed for imparting instructions or conducting research, with the approval of the Academic Council in the University or any College or Institution maintained or recognised by the University. Sudarshan Mahavidyalaya, Lalgaon, is a college affiliated to the respondent No. 1 University and is receiving grants-in-aid from M. P. Uchcha Shiksha Anudan Ayog. Statute No. 25 prescribes the procedure for election of members to the Court. Under clause 3, the Registrar is required to publish provisional list of electoral roll and circulate the same to the respective colleges. Under clause 4, any Lecturer whose name has been omitted from the electoral roll may apply in the prescribed form for inclusion of his name. Under clause 5 on such an application being received, the same has to be scrutinised by the committee consisting of 2 Deans to be nominated by the Kulpati and the Registrar, respondents 2 and 3. Against the order of the Scrutinising Committee, appeal lies to the Kulpati under sub-clause (3 ). The election programme was announced by the Registrar on 23-1-1984 and on the same day provisional electoral roll was exhibited and circulated. As the petitioner's name and names of 11 other Lecturers of the said College were missing from the electoral roll of Lecturers, he made an application for inclusion of his name. His application was forwarded to the Scrutinising Committee who held that only Lecturers regularly appointed as per the Adhiniyam are alone to be included in the electoral roll and not the ad hoc or irregular appointees. However, the Committee found difficulty in giving a final decision and referred the matter to the competent authority on 15-2-1984 which was the date of scrutiny. On the same day, the Registrar-respondent No. 3, also rejected the representation saying that since the appointment of the petitioner and the other 11 Lecturers were illegal and not in accordance with the provisions of the Adhiniyam and the rules framed thereunder, their names cannot be included in the electoral roll. The counting of votes was to take place on 7-4-1984 but in the meantime the present petition was filed and ad interim stay was obtained on 31-3-84 that elections may take place but result of the election from the Teachers' Constituency shall not be declared until further orders.

( 3 ) THE case of the petitioner is that he is M. A. in Socio

Click Here to Read the rest of this document