Removal from a tenure-based post affecting a person's status or civil rights necessitates strict adherence to the principles of natural justice to ensure fairness and prevent arbitrary exercise of administrative power.

ORDER :

SHUBHA MEHTA, J.

1. The challenge in the present appeal is to the judgment dated 02.02.2026 passed by the learned Single Judge whereby, he has set aside the order dated 18.07.2023 whereby the petitioner was restrained and removed from discharging duties as Head of the Geography Department of University of Rajasthan and appointed another Professor as Head of the Geography Department vide order dated 04.10.2023 which too was quashed by the learned Single Judge.

2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the basis of challenge by the respondent before the High Court to the impugned order was with the assertion that the order has been passed merely because the writ petitioner-respondent had lodged an FIR with regard to appointment of other teacher and the same was made as a basis to remove him from the post of Head of the Department of Geography.

3. Learned counsel further submits that there were complaints filed by students, researchers and teachers with respect to functioning of the respondent and therefore, in order to conduct inquiry, he was removed from the post of Head of Department (HOD) and another person was appointed as HOD.

4. We find that the learned Single Judge while passing the judgment dated 02.02.2026 has noticed that the respondent was appointed on regular basis as Head of the Department for a period of three years vide order dated 21.04.2023. On 18.07.2023, the Vice Chancellor passed an order removing him from the post of HOD with direction to hand over the charge to the Dean, Science Faculty.

5. Learned Single Judge has found that there was no notice given by the Vice Chancellor to the writ petitioner before removing him from the post. It is also noticed that a Committee was formed which too has concluded that there is no sufficient material to justify the removal from the post of HOD, Geography Department.

6. The appointment of HOD is a tenure appointment and as per the guidelines of the Scheme of Rotation of headship as approved by the Syndicate vide its Res. No.6 dated 16.04.1992 following its earlier resolution dated 22.12.1985, which reads as under:

“ii) the tenure of Headship of the Department be raised from 2 years to 3 years. In case where the Vice-Chancellor at his discretion feels that the retention of a particular person as Head beyond the tenure is necessary for completing any. Academic Project/Research Project.

or work in hand, his term may be extended for one academic year or more by the Syndicate. If for any reason the Vice-Chancellor at his discretion feels that a change in the Headship or a Department even prior to the completion of the term of the exist incumbent is necessary in the interest of the Department a change in Headship of the Department be made”

7. Thus not only can the tenure be of one year but can only be extended for three years and also be extended for one academic year or more by the Syndicate. The power lies with the Vice Chancellor to change the headship of the Department even prior to the completion of the term of the existing incumbent. However, for exercising its powers, he has to exercise his discretion which obviously has to be judicial discretion. Judicial discretion has been interpreted by the Apex Court in the case of A.K. Kraipak and Ors. vs Union of India and Ors. , reported in 1969 (2) SCC 262, which made the following observations:

‘‘13. The dividing line between an administrative power and a quasi-judicial power is quite thin and is being gradually obliterated