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

2000 Supreme(SC) 983

2000(7) Supreme 68
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
G.B. Pattanaik & U.C. Banerjee, JJ.
Shivaji University, Kolhapur & Anr. -Appellants
versus
Sangameshwar Edu. Society & Ors. -Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 3241 of 2000
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 18458 of 1999)
Decided on 5-5-2000

Headnote:Service Law-By interim order High Court directed appointment of respondent as Principal-in-Charge on provisional basis-No right can be said to be accrued on selected personnel until selection made by selection committee was approved by competent authority and communicated to person concerned-Vice Chancellor, competent authority, found some controversy in selection process and interfered with-Impugned order by interim direction could not have been passed and was liable to be set aside-Senior most man in the college to continue as Principal-in-Charge. (Para 2)

       

ORDER

Leave granted.

2. Though, this appeal is directed against an interim order of Bombay High Court directing appointment of S.M. Chattarji as the Principal-in-Charge on a provisional basis, but having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case we think it appropriate to interfere with the said order. As in our view, no rights can be said to have accrued on the selected personnel until and unless the selection made by the Selection Committee is approved by the competent authority, and on the basis of such approval order is communicated to the person concerned. It is no doubt true that not having a Principal in an institution would not be in the interest of institution itself, but the Vice-Chancellor, who is the competent authority having come to the conclusion that there has been some controversy in the process of selection, and having interfered with the same, and the matter being pending before the High Court in a writ petition while we do not think it proper to express any opinion on the merits of the matter, but we have no hesitation to come to the conclusion that by way of interim direction, the impugned order could not have been passed. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order and direct that the senior most man in the college would continue as Principal-in-Charge, and request the Bombay High Court to dispose of the writ petition as expeditiously as possible. The appeal is disposed of.

Appeal disposed of.

**************

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top