Hon'ble Dr. Satish Chandra,J.
Heard Sri Anil Tiwari Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Apoorva Tiwari learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Ravi Kumar Mishra learned counsel for the opposite parties no. 1, 2 & 3 and Sri B. K. Singh learned counsel for the opposite party no. 4. All the respondents are allowed four weeks for counter affidavit. The petitioner will have one week for rejoinder affidavit. List in the second week of February, 2010.
A preliminary objection has been taken that the writ petition is not maintainable against the order of Vice-Chancellor as an appeal lies to the Chancellor under Section 68 (4) of the U.P. Universities Act.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the Committee of Management- the petitioner that the Vice-Chancellor did not give notice to the petitioner nor considered the material on which the respondent no. 4 Sri Sher Bahadur Singh the Principal of the College was placed under suspension. The communication sent by the Secretary, Committee of Management to the Principal, the respondent no.4, has been taken to be sufficient to stay the suspension order dated 08.10.2009. He further submits that the reasons given by the Vice-Chancellor, that the language of the charges shows pre-conceived notion of the Committee of Management and that there are no good ground on which the Principal could be suspended, could not be given without hearing the Committee of Management. He further submits that though it may not be necessary to give personal hearing to the Committee of Management, an opportunity of make representation with the material which framed the basis of the charges has to be given before reaching the conclusion, -2- which virtually takes away sting of all the charges against the respondent no.4.
Learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 4, submits that he was allowed to join only on the orders of the Apex Court and that all the charges are concocted. In fact respondent no.4, lodged a F.I.R. in which police has submitted charge-sheet against the members of Committee of Management.
Prima-facie we find substance in the submission that the Vice-Chancellor should have given an opportunity to the Committee of Management to place the material before him on the basis of which, the charges were framed and that he could not have stayed the suspension order, recording reasons in favour of the Principal of the College without hearing the aggrieved parties.
Untill further order of this Court, the operation of the order dated 27.11.2009 passed by the Vice-Chancellor, Dr. Ram Manohar Lohiya Awadh University, Faizabad staying the suspension order dated 08.10.2009, shall remain stayed. It will be open to the Vice Chancellor to give an opportunity of hearing to both the parties, peruse the material placed before him and pass a fresh order in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 5.1.2010 VNP/-