IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 15348 of 2008 Between: Dr.P.China Venkateswarlu S/o.Ramanaiah Sri Venkateswara University Oriental Research Institute Tirupathi, Chittoor District ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Sri Venkateswara University, rep.by its Registrar Tirupathi 2 The Vice Chancellor , Sri Venkateswara University Tirupathi 3 Sri Venkateswara University Oriental Research Institute TIrupathi .....RESPONDENT(S) Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue writ of mandmaus or any other appropraite writ or order or direction declaring that: a. the proceedings dated 18.8.2007 of the Vice Chancellor of the Sri Venkateswara University dated 18.8.2007 as arbitrary,illegal and as unjust b.that the action of the 1st respondent University in converting the regular appointment of the writ petitioner pursuant to the Notification dated 10.11.2006 as Assistant Professor in Sri Venkateswara University Oriental Research Institute, Tirupathi,as for one academic year as arbitrary,illegal, and as unjust and issue a consequential direction directing the respondent University not to interfere in any manner whatsoever either by discontinuing or otherwise of the services of the writ petitioner as Assistant Professor in the S.V.University Oriental Research institute , Tirupathi,and pass Counsel for the Petitioner:KUM.C.SINDHU KUMARI Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.KASAJAGANMOHAN REDDY The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 15348 of 2008 ORDER: Sri Venkateswara University, the 1st respondent herein, issued advertisement, dated 10-11-2006, inviting applications from candidates for appointment against vacancies of various posts in different departments. The petitioner submitted application for the post of Assistant Professor. The call letter dated 04-03-2007 was issued to him, intimating that the interview would be held on 31-03-2007. Accordingly, the petitioner attended the interview. The recommendations of the Selection Committee were placed before the Executive Council, and ultimately through orders dated 03-07-2007, issued by the Registrar, the petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor at S.V.U. Oriental Research Institute, Tirupati in the pay scale of Rs.8,000-275-13,500, besides Dearness allowance and H.R.A. etc. The petitioner joined duty and was working as Assistant Professor at S.V.U.Oriental Research Institute, Tirupati. The Vice-Chancellor of the University issued proceedings dated 18-08-2007, in supersession of the proceedings of the Executive Council, as well as the order of appointment dated 03-07-2007, directing that the appointment of the petitioner shall be on the monthly pay of Rs.8,000/- with permissible allowance, and for a period not exceeding one year, as per Section 49 of the A.P. Universities Act, 1991 (for short ‘the Act’). The same is challenged in this writ petition. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, and the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. The petitioner submitted application for the post of Assistant Professor, in response to the employment notification dated 10-11-2006, issued by the University. On the basis of evaluation of his merit and performance at interview, the Selection Committee selected him, and the same was approved by the Executive Council. The proceedings dated 03-07-2007, issued by the University, read as under: “Dr./Sri/Smt. P.Chinna Venkateswarlu is temporarily appointed as Assistant Professor in S.V.U.Oriental Research Institute, Tirupati, in the existing vacancy in the scale of pay of Rs.8000-275- 13500, besides Dearness Allowance, HRA etc., at the University rates. The above appointment is subject to the result of the W.P.No.1717 of 2007 pending in the Hon’ble High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad. He/She is required to enter in to an agreement of service with the University in the prescribed form on a non-judicial stamp paper of the value of Rs.100/- within a month from the date of his joining. The appointment is also subject to Statues, Ordinances, Rules and Regulations of the University that are in force and that may come into force from time to time. The appointee is governed by new pension scheme already in force as applicable for all the new entrants vide orders 2nd read above. The appointee should report himself/herself for duty to the Director, S.V.U.Oriental Research Institute, Tirupati on or after 03-07-2007 but not later than 02-08-2007, failing which the offer of appointment stands cancelled”. The proceedings referred to above, partake the character of a regular order of appointment, against a clear vacancy. The petitioner joined duty and was working at the S.V.U.Oriental Research Institute, Tirupati. About one-and-half months later, the Vice-Chancellor issued an order, on 18-08-2007, as under: “In supersession of the proceedings 1st and the memo 2nd read above, and in pursuance of the orders of the Vice-Chancellor, Dr. P.Chinna Venkateswarulu is temporarily appointed as Assistant Professor, in the SVU Oriental Research Institute, Tirupati on Rs.8000/- in the scale of pay of Rs.8000-275- 13500, besides Dearness Allowance, HRA etc., at the University rates, for a period not exceeding one year as per Section 49 of the A.P. Universities Act, 1991. The offer of the above appointment is strictly for one year from the date of joining i.e. 03-07-2007 afternoon, and terminable at any time without assigning any reasons thereon. He is required to acknowledge receipt of the proceedings”. The question that arises for consideration is, as to whether the order dated 18-08-2007 can be sustained in law ? The first aspect is, about the jurisdiction of the Vice-Chancellor. It has already been pointed out that the proceedings dated 03-07-2007 were issued by the Executive Council of the University. Under the Act, it is the competent Authority. Though the Vice-Chancellor happens to be a member of the Executive Council, an independent Executive Authority, in his own way; he is not conferred with the power to supersede the orders passed by the Executive Council. If the order dated 03-07-2007 was incorrect or untenable, on account of any reason, the only authority that could have rectified is, the Executive Council. Though it is stated that the Executive Council has ratified the proceedings, dated 18-08- 2007, issued by the Vice-Chancellor, the initial material irregularity as to lack of jurisdiction cannot be cured. The second aspect is, as to the procedure, that is followed in issuing the impugned proceedings. Assuming that the proceedings were issued by a Competent Authority, the rights, that have accrued to the petitioner, under the order dated 03-07-2007, could not have been taken away, except by conducting an inquiry, or issuing a show cause notice, duly indicating the reasons for the proposed action. Nothing of that sort has taken place. The impugned proceedings were issued in flagrant violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore, the impugned proceedings cannot be sustained in law, and they are accordingly set aside. Consequently, the petitioner shall be continued as Assistant Professor in the pay scale of Rs.8,000-275-13,500, under the orders dated 03-07-2007. It is, however, made clear that in case the appointment of the petitioner is found to be untenable, or incorrect, it shall be open to the respondents to take necessary action, in accordance with law. Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. __________ 17.07.2008 JSU ..... REGISTRAR // TRUE COPY // SECTION OFFICER To 1.2CCs to 2.2CD copies Form-NIC-OGS/WP{TRK} THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION NO : 15348 of 2008 Date: 17.07.2008 JSU