SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(MP) 787

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Vivek Agarwal, J.
Ravindra Kumar Yadav – Appellant
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Writ Petition No. 8421 of 2023
Decided On : 05-04-2023

Advocates Appeared:
Anshuman Singh, Advocate, Manas Mani Verma, Advocate, Nikhil Bhat, Advocate, L.C. Patne, Advocate

The central legal point established is that appointments of officers under the Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, including the Director (Sports), must adhere to the prescribed procedures under Sec. 49(2) and Statute-20.

Headnote:

Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam - Appointment of Director (Sports) - Sec. 18, Sec. 49(2), Statute-20

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners challenged the appointment of private respondent No.4 as Director (Sports) at Rani Durgawati Vishwavidyalaya, Jabalpur on deputation, contending that it violated the provisions of Sec. 18 of the M.P. Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appointment of the Director (Sports) on deputation without following the prescribed procedure under Sec. 49(2) and Statute-20 was arbitrary and violated the statutory provisions.

Issues: Violation of statutory provisions in the appointment of Director (Sports) on deputation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appointment of officers, including the Director (Sports), should be made in accordance with the provisions contained in Sec. 49(2) of the Adhiniyam of 1973 and Statute-20.

Final Decision: The impugned order appointing the Director (Sports) on deputation was quashed, and the university was directed to appoint an appropriate person after following the due process as prescribed under the Act and the Statute.

JUDGMENT

VIVEK AGARWAL, J. - This petition is filed by the petitioners being aggrieved of order dtd. 09/03/2019 (Annexure-P/6) whereby private respondent No.4-Dr. Ramesh Prasad Shukla was given posting as Director (Sports) at Rani Durgawati Vishwavidyalaya, Jabalpur on deputation. His names appears at serial No.47 in the impugned order (Annexure-P/6).

2. Petitioners' contention is that they are working as Professor and Assistant Professor in the Department of Physical Education in RDVV, Jabalpur. The posts are to be filled by the university in terms of the provisions contained in Sec. 18 of the M.P. Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Adhiniyam of 1973'). It is submitted that since the post of Sport Officer will fall in the definition of 'other Officers' provided in Sec. 18 of the Adhiniyam of 1973, therefore, it is to be filled in terms of the provisions contained under Sec. 49(2) of the Adhiniyam of 1973 by constituting a committee as prescribed in the said provision i.e. Sec. 49(2) of the Adhiniyam of 1973. Thus, the order (Annexure-P/6) as far as it relates to private respondent No.6 is bad in law.

3. Shri Manas Mani Verma, learned Govt. Advocate, submits that State Government has passed the said order and has posted private respondent to the university which does not suffer from any infirmity.

4. Shri L.C. Patne, learned counsel for respondent no.4, has drawn attention of this Court to the Business (Allocation) Rules framed by the State of Madhya Pradesh in exercise of powers conferred by Clauses (2) and (3) of Article 166 of the Constitution of India. He submits that higher education is dealt with in Chapter -XXXVIII. Under Chapter -XXXVIII (A)-11. Universities and all incidental matters including development programmes, opening of faculties and grants from UGC is covered. It is submitted that as per entry-17, all matters relating to the service with which the department is concerned (other than matters allotted to the Finance Department and the General Administration Department) e.g. appointments, posting, transfers, pay, leave, pension, promotions, provident funds, deputation, punishments and memorials are within the domain of Higher Education Department, therefore, when this is read with F.R. 110 of the Fundamental Rules which authorises Government to transfer a Government servant to foreign service, it is transfer by deputation, therefore, no indulgence is required in the hands of the Court and the impugned order be sustained without any interference.

5. Shri Manas Mani Verma, learned Government Advocate, as per the directions of this Court, has produced photocopy of the proposal which was mooted by the Government. This appears to be a file from the Office of the Commissioner, Higher Education, Madhya Pradesh, Bhopal bearing No.255/Shakha 02/19. Heading is Shekshanik Samvarg Antargat Sthanantaran Prastav. Vide this proposal persons whose names are mentioned in column No.2 working on different posts of Assistant Professor/Professor/Associate Professor have been transferred from various Government Colleges mentioned in column No.3 to various Government Colleges mentioned in column No.4.

6. Name of private respondent No.4 appears in this proposal at serial No.27 wherein he is shown as Sports Officer working at Government Model Science College, Jabalpur from whom a proposal was made to transfer him as Director (Sports), Rani Durgawati Vishwavidyalaya, Jabalpur. Name of private respondent appears at serial No.27. There is no mention of transferring the private respondent on deputation as is mentioned in the impugned order (Annexure-P/6) at serial No.47. Thus, it is evident that words 'on deputation' have been inserted in the transfer order (Annexure-P/6) though there was no such proposal as has been brought on record by Shri Manas Mani Verma, learned Govt. Advocate.

7. This proposal was forwarded by the Additional Commissioner, Higher Education, it was signed by the Commissioner, Higher Educati

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top