WA 181/2010 BEFORE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI, CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING) HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.P.KATAKEY Ranjan Gogoi, CJ (Acting) The challenge in the writ petition is against an order dated 29.4.2010 d ismissing WP(C) No. 1008/2010 filed by the writ petitioner. In the said writ pet ition the appellant/ writ petitioner had challenged an order dated 20.1.2010 pas sed by the Director of Higher Education reconstituting the Governing Body of Jal eswar College under the provisions of the Assam Non-Government College Managemen t Rules, 2001 (as amended). The appellant/ writ petitioner, it may be noticed, was holding the post of President of the Governing Body since 4.2.2008. The principal contention advanced before the learned Single Judge by the appellant/ writ petitioner was that the Jaleswar College was in receipt of fina ncial assistance from the Government which was not same as ad-hoc grants so as t o make the provisions of the Rules in question applicable to the college. The le arned Single Judge taking note of the several years during which financial assis tance was received by the college took the view that the nomenclature of the gra nt would not be very relevant and that as financial assistance has been received on yearly basis for the last several years, it can be understood that the colle ge was in receipt of ad-hoc grants from the Government. The learned Single Judge also took note of the fact that the petitioner himself was appointed as the Pre sident of the Governing Body of the college by an order dated 4.2.2008 passed by the Director of Higher Education and, therefore, the petitioner could not have legitimately and bonafide urged that the same Director did not have the power to re-constitute the Governing Body. On due consideration, we are in full agreement with the views expressed by the learned Single Judge. Receipt of financial assistance by the college from the State Government would amount to receipt of ad-hoc grants by the college so as to make the provisions of the Rules in question applicable to the college in question. That apart, it is incomprehensible as to how the appellant/ writ peti tioner who himself was a beneficiary of the order of the Director dated 4.2.2008 can legitimately maintain a challenge, which if accepted would amount to a situ ation where the Director would be empowered to constitute a Governing Body of a college under the Rules but not to re-constitute/ change the same. Such a situat ion cannot be visualized in law. For the aforesaid reasons, this appeal is found to be without any merit and/or substance. It is, accordingly, dismissed, however, without imposing any c ost.