2026 Supreme(Online)(All) 499
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
THE COMMITTEE OF MANAGEMENT AGRASEN KANYA POST GRADUATE COLLEGE AND ANOTHER – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF U.P. AND 23 OTHERS – Respondent
WRIA 1599 / 2026
##PAGE1##
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 1599 of 2026
The Committee Of Management Agrasen Kanya
Post Graduate College And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
The State Of U.P. And 23 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Aditya Pandey
Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C., Ved Prakash Dwivedi
Court No. - 32
HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
1. Heard Sri R.K. Ojha, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Aditya
Pandey, learned counsel for petitioners, Sri Satya Prakash Rai, learned
counsel for Respondent-University and Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior
Advocate assisted by Sri V.P. Dwivedi, learned counsel for private-
respondents.
2. This matter is an off shoot of an order dated 13.10.2025 passed by this
Court in Writ-A No. 14890 of 2025 filed by some of private-respondents.
For reference said order is reproduced hereinafter:
“1.Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ved
Prakash Dwivedi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Sri S.P.Singh on
behalf of respondent nos.2 and 3 and Sri Aditya Pandey for respondent
no.5.
2. It is not under much dispute that all the petitioners have worked for
sufficient period i.e. more than two decades as Assistant Professors in
different subjects at Agrasen Kanya P.G. College, Bulanala,
Parmanandpur, Varanasi on ad-hoc basis however, without any
substantial reason petitioners' services were terminated purportedly that in
the year 2019 the post has already been filled up by appointment as there
are financial constraints.
##PAGE2##WRIA No. 1599 of 2026
2
3. Court is of the view that petitioners, the Assistant Professors, who have
worked for more than two decades cannot be terminated in one fine
morning without mentioning details thereof, therefore, this writ petition is
disposed of with a direction that the concerned respondent will provide all
details behind the impugned order, so that the petitioners may confront
them in accordance with law. It is also observed that concerned
respondent will consider the case of the petitioners in accordance with
law within a short period.”
3. The Committee of Management of concerned College is before this
Court by way of filing present writ petition.
4. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for petitioners submits that in
pursuance of above order, they have provided details including the
reasons of late decision of removal of each private respondents by
different dated orders, though admittedly private respondents have not
challenged it.
5. Learned Senior Advocate further submits that private respondents were
appointed between 1997 to 2014 without adhering to the detail procedure
provided for the purpose off appointment of Assistant Professors mainly
in the subjects Hindi and Sociology since there was a delay on behalf of
State for conducting process of substantive appointment and such
appointments were made in 2020 onwards. Though it is not disputed that
in the same capacity the said respondents have worked for almost two
decades.
6. Learned Senior Advocate further submits that said respondents were
not appointed under any self financed scheme, therefore, they have no
statutory right if their services are terminated. Said respondents were paid
by the Management from its own sources and since in the last 5-6
Academic years, the number of students in said subjects were reduced
drastically and petitioner Committee of Management has no money to pay
their salary, therefore, the hard decision was taken.
7. Learned Senior Advocate further submits that details were provided to
the Director of Higher Education also however, the same was not
considered. He further submits that Director is not the appropriate
authority rather appropriate authority is the Respondent-University.
##PAGE3##WRIA No. 1599 of 2026
3
8. Sri Khare, learned Senior Advocate appearing for private-respondents
submits that it is their consistent case that they were appointed through
proper process under self financed scheme, therefore, they have right to
continue till the substantive appointment be made by Management.