Associate Patna University Act, 1962, S. 26(2), Cl. (iii) Under S. 26(2), the commission had to have the assistance of two experts in the subject for which an appointment was to be made. Clause (iii) of that sub-sec. provides that such experts “shall be associated” with the Commission, whose duty it shall be to give expert advice to the Commission but who shall have no right to vote. The Chancellor, in our opinion, read more in this sub-sec. that what it contains or requires. The sub-section merely requires that the two experts shall be “associated” with the Commission before it made its recommendation. It does not say that such association can only be by their presence at the time of the interviews. If that were so, it was easy for the Legislature to provide that the expert or experts shall remain present at the time of the interviews. The benefit of expert advice can be had both by the experts remaining present at the time of the interviews and also by their advice communicated to the Commission by post or otherwise. There is nothing in clause (iii) suggesting that only the first method was the one which was included. On the contrary the deliberate use of the word “associated” indicates that the Legislature thought that such advice could be made available by both the methods. (Dr. Chetkar Jha v. Dr. V.P. Verma, (1970) 2 SCC 217 (223)