IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2448 of 2008 SATYENDRA NARAYAN SINGH Versus VEER KUNWAR SINGH UNIVERSITY & ORS For the Petitioner : Sri Rajendra Pd. Singh, Sr. Adv. Rajeev Kr. Singh, Adv. Nawal Kishor Singh, Adv. Rakesh Kumar Singh, Adv. For the University : Shri Ajay Bihari Sinha, Adv. ----------- 5/ 23/01/2009. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the respondent University. The controversy revolves around the constitution of the governing body of Tapeshwar Singh Indu Mahila Mahavidyalaya, Arrah-Bhojpur. Earlier the college was under the Magadh University, Bodh Gaya, but after bifurcation of the Magadh University the college has now come within the jurisdiction of the Veer Kunwar Singh University, Arrah. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that after constitution of the ad-hoc governing body in terms of Section-60 of the Bihar University Act, 1976 read with Statute-32, a meeting was held on 5.12.2007 leading to constitution of a regular governing body which is also evident from the letter dated 5.1.2008 sent to the statutory Government Representative. The University was, therefore, illegally trying to interfere with the duly constituted governing body. Mr. Ajay Bihari Sinha, appearing for the 2 respondent University sought to persuade this Curt that the governing body, claimed to have been constituted, was not in accordance with law and did not find approval of the Vice Chancellor. Of the creation and constitution of such governing body who has subsequently approved another on 19.12.2008 by an order dated 5.1.2009/2.1.2009. The communication sought to be relied on by the respondent University in its counter affidavit at Annexure-F is an order dated 5.1.2009, stated to have been communicated to the persons concerned at serial Nos.1, 2 and 3, i.e. even before its issuance, on 2.1.2009. Be that as it may, learned counsel for the University fairly acknowledges that Rule-28 of Statute- 32 clearly provides for the procedure and manner in which a governing body is to be suspended, dissolved or cancelled. On the facts of this case it does not appear that any of such procedure has been followed. Shri Sinha, therefore, submits that the competent authority in terms of Rule-28 of Statute-32 shall proceed in accordance with law on the issue of the constitution of the governing body of the college and take a final decision after hearing all concerned within a within a maximum period of two weeks from the date of 3 receipt/production of a copy of this order. Learned Senior Counsel Shri Rajendra Prasad Singh representing the petitioners submits that no sooner than the date of hearing is communicated to the petitioners by the University authorities, they shall be present for the same. This Court requires the Vice Chancellor of the respondent Veer Kunwar Singh University to fix such date of hearing on the day that a certified copy of the present order is produced before him, in presence of the person presenting the same. At this stage, learned counsel Shri Bhanu Pratap Singh submits that he represents the new governing body stated to have been constituted with the approval of the University. This Court does not consider it necessary to make any separate observations with regard to him in view of the nature of the directions already given to the respondent University. A governing body is an essential requirement for functioning of a college quite apart from the statutory requirement. The responsibility shall, therefore, lie completely at the door of the University if no governing body is constituted within the period of two weeks, as aforesaid, with all its attendant 4 consequences. The Court, however, does grant liberty to the University to even proceed ex parte against any party, if necessary, for non-cooperation after recording its satisfaction to that effect in writing. In the interregnum, considering the position in law that the governing body claimed to be represented by the petitioners is alleged to be contrary to law in violation of the provisions prescribed in Rule- 28 of Statute-32, this Court considers it appropriate to direct that for this period of two weeks only it shall continue to function as the governing body, but whose actions shall ultimately remain subject to the scrutiny of the new governing body that shall come into operation in accordance with law. The writ application is disposed in the aforesaid terms. KC ( Navin Sinha, J.)