The court ruled that the authority to assign the Principal role resides with the Regional Additional Director, and orders issued without following proper protocols are invalid.

Ashish Shroti, J.

1. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 27/02/2025 (Annexure- P/1), whereby respondent no.3 has directed handing over of current charge of the post of Principal of the college to respondent no.5.

2. The facts necessary for decision of this case are that the petitioner is working as Assistant Professor (Economics) in S.S.L. Jain P.G. College, Vidisha (M.P.) which is aided by the State Government. One Dr. (Smt.) Shobha Jain was working as in-charge Principal of this college and was due to retire w.e.f. 28/02/2025. The Rajmata Vijaya Raje Scindia Girls P.G. College, Vidisha is the lead college in respect of S.S.L. Jain P.G. College, Vidisha (M.P.). In view of nearing retirement of Dr. (Smt.) Shobha Jain, respondent no.6 made recommendation for giving charge of the post of the Principal of the college to the petitioner in view of the fact that she is the senior most Assistant Professor in the college. It appears that the petitioner also made application to the State Government for grant of charge of the post of Principal to her. In response, Under Secretary, Higher Education Department wrote to respondent no.3 on 24/02/2025 (Annexure-P/3) to initiate the process for grant of charge of the post of Principal in accordance with rules.

3. The Additional Director, Higher Education, Bhopal-Narmadapuram Division, Bhopal- respondent no.7, passed an order on 27/02/2025 (Annexure-P/4) thereby directing grant of charge of the post of the Principal to the petitioner on account of retirement of Dr. (Smt.) Shobha Jain. It is stated in the said order that drawing and disbursing power shall continue to remain with respondent no.6 i.e. Principal of lead college. In compliance of this order, the petitioner offered her joining on the post of Principal on 28/02/2025 (Annexure- P/4-A).

4. It is further gathered from the record that the meeting of the Governing Body of the Society was held on 28/01/2025, wherein a resolution was passed to give charge of the post of Principal of the college to respondent no.5. This resolution was passed keeping in view the punishment which was imposed on the petitioner on account of certain charges of indecent behaviour. In view of resolution of Governing Body, the respondent no.3 wrote to respondent no.7 on 27/02/2025 itself (Annexure-P/5) requesting him to cancel the order dated 27/02/2025 (Annexure-P/4) on the ground that the said order is in contravention with the resolution of Governing Body of the society.

5. Simultaneously, respondent no.3 passed another order on 27/02/2025 itself thereby directing the charge of the post of the Principal of the college to be given to respondent no.5 (Annexure -P/1). The petitioner has filed this petition against this order passed by respondent no.5.

6. The respondent no.4 had appeared on caveat. The respondents no.1, 2, 6 & 7 were represented by the Government counsel while respondents no.3, 4 & 5 appeared suo-moto through their counsel. This Court on 20/06/2025 granted time to respondents to file reply within a period of two weeks. The time was further granted on 22/07/2025 and looking to the urgency involved in the case, the matter was directed to be listed on 05/08/2025. However, reply has been filed by respondent no.3 alone. Since the issue raised by the petitioner is with regard to the authority of respondent no.3 to pass order dated 27/02/2025 (Annexure-P/1), the matter has been heard finally with the consent of the parties.

7. Considered the arguments of counsel for the parties and perused the record.

8. The learned Senior