petitioner was appointed on the post of Reader in accordance with the rules and regulations of the University. 3). i have heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, perused the pleadings and the documents appended thereto. The Kuladhipati of the University exercising his power under Section 12 of the Chhattisgarh Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973 (for short “the Adhiniyam, 1973”) annulled the resolution passed by the executive council for appointment of the petitioner on the post of Reader. Section 12 of the Adhiniyam, 1973 reads as under : “12. Kuladhipati and his powers.—-(1) The Governor of the Chhattisgarh shall be the Kuladhipati of University. (2)The Kuladhipati shall, by virtue of his office, be the Head of the University and the President of the court and shall, when present preside at meetings of the court and at any convocation of the University. '1‘ (3)The Kuladhipati may — (a)call for any papers or information relating to the affairs ofthe University; and (b)[for reasons to be recorded, refer any matter except a matter falling under Section 55] for reconsideration to any officer or authority of the University that has previously considered such matter. (4) The Kuladhipati may, by an order in writing, annul- (a)any proceedings of any officer, authority, Committee or body of the University, constituted by or under this Act, which is not in conformity‘with this Act, the Statutes, Ordinances or the Regulations, or (b)any proceedings of any authority, Committee or other body which has been referred to him by the Kulpati under sub-section (7) of Section 15, if he is satisfied that such proceedings are prejudicial to the interests of the University. Provided that before making such order he shall call upon the officer, authority, committee or body concerned to show cause why such an order should not be made and if any cause is shown within the time specified by him in this behalf he shall consider the same. (4-A) Where the Kuladhipati passes an order annulling the proceedings under sub-section (4), he may make such subsequent order in relation thereto in conformity with this Act, rules, Statutes, Ordinances or Regulations as he may deem fit in the‘interest of the University and the order so made shall be final. ,(5)Every proposal to confer an honorary degreeshall be subject to the Confirmation ofthe Kuladhipati. (6)The Kuladhipati shall exercise such powers as may be conferred on him by or under this Act." The petitioner has failed to produce the order dated 24-12-2004 passed by the Kuladhipati. 4) The petitioner has not alleged any mala fide, arbitrariness or discrimination in the order passed by the Kuladhipatit Section 12 of the Adhiniyam, 1973 does not provide for issuance of notice to the employee/officer concerned who has been appointed on the basis of recommendation of the executive council. calling upon officer, authority, if any cause is shown within the specified time by him in this behalf. Thus, the issue raised by the petitioner cannot be adjudicated for want of materials. 5) Sub-section (4) provides for committee or body concerned to show cause why such an order should not be made and As far as non-compliance of principles of natural justice is concerned, in Viveka Nand Sethi vs. Chairman, J & K Bank Ltd. and Others1, the Supreme Court observed as under: “22. The principle of natural justice, it is trite, is no unruly horse. When facts are admitted, an enquiry would be an empty formality. Even the principle of estoppel will apply. [See Gurjeewan Garewal (Dr.) v. Dr. Sum/'tra Dash]. The principles of natural justice are required to be complied with having regard to the fact situation obtaining therein. lt cannot be put in a straitjacket formula. It cannot be applied in a vacuum without reference to the relevant facts and circumstances of the case. [See State of Punjab vs. Jagir Singh and Karnataka SRTC vs. S.G. Kofturappaj. " 6) ln view of the foregoing, the impugned order is unexceptionable, just & proper and warranting no interference. Accordingly, to be dismissed and it is hereby dismissed at the motion stage itself. i; Sd/" ‘l _ Satish K.Agnihotri Judge the petition is liable ‘1 __ (2065) Eb 5 soc 337 I : i l