JUDGMENT R.K. Agrawal, J.
1. By means of the present writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Dr. Kiran Shanker seeks the following reliefs:
(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for the record of the case and quashing the order impugned dated 31.3.2006 passed by the respondent - Committee of Management of the College and the resolution of the Committee of Management dated 31.3.2006 (Annexures - 2 and 3 to the writ petition) respectively, wrongly and illegally relieving the petitioner from the post of officiating Principal of the College,
(ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents authorities not to interfere in the peaceful functioning of the petitioner as officiating Principal of the College,
(iii) to issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the circumstances of the case to meet the ends of justice,
(iv) to award costs of this writ petition to the petitioner.
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present petition are as follows:
According to the petitioner, he was appointed on the post of Lecturer in Physics on 20.8.1968 in C.M.P. Degree College, Allahabad, (hereinafter referred to as "the College") which was at that time an Associated College of the University of Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as "the University"), His appointment was as a result of selection made by a duly constituted selection committee under the provisions of the Statutes governing the University. He was confirmed on the post of the Lecturer on 20.8.1970. He was promoted to the post of the Reader grade on 1.1.1983 and was granted the designation of Reader on 1.1.1986. Since then he has been discharging his duties to the utmost satisfaction of his superiors. The post of the Principal in the College fell vacant and as the regular selection was not held, the Committee of Management of the College decided to make officiating arrangement so that the financial and administrative work of the College could be conducted smoothly. The petitioner being the seniormost Reader/teacher in the College, was appointed as officiating Principal of the College vide resolution of the Committee of Management dated 28,6.2002 for a period of three months. He took charge as officiating Principal of the College on 1.7.2002 and his appointment has been extended vide resolution passed by the Committee of Management on 27.9.2002 till the date of his superannuation or till the incumbent recommended by the U.P. Higher Education Service Commission is accepted for appointment by the College. It may be mentioned here that from 14.7.2005 with the enactment of the University of Allahabad Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") by the Parliament, the College has become a Constituent College of the University. According to the petitioner, he has been discharging the duties and the work of the officiating Principal to the utmost satisfaction of all concerned. However, to the utter dismay and shock, he received a communication vide letter dated 31.3.2006 from the Committee of Management that he has been relieved from the post of the Principal of the College and one Sri V.K. Sinha, respondent No. 6, has been appointed as officiating Principal for a period of three months. The communication dated 31.3.2006 relieving the petitioner from the post of officiating Principal is under challenge in the present petition.
3. According to the petitioner, after the College had become a Constituent College of the University with effect from 14.7.2005, the right to appoint the Principal which includes the officiating Principal also, vests in the University and the Committee of Management has no power to make any appointment on the post of the Principal in the College. As the regular selection for the post of the Principal in the College had not been made so far, the petitioner who continued to officiate as Principal beyond 30.9.2002 upto the end of March, 2006, is entitled to continue and cannot be removed from the said post as he has been discharging his duties to the utmost sincerity and has operated the financial accounts very smoothly and has also maintained strict disciplinary control in the College. According to the petitioner, his removal has been made without serving any show cause notice or giving any opportunity of hearing to defend himself and the removal is wholly arbitrary and unceremonious. According to the petitioner, as per the Rules of the College made under the Statutes which govern the University and its Associated Colleges before the enactment of the Act, the seniormost teacher of the College has to be appointed as the officiating principal and he being the seniormost teacher in the College, is entitled to hold and discharge the functions and duties of the officiating Principal. Reference in this regard has been made to Statue 13.20 of the First Statutes of the University framed under Section 38(4) and 49(m) of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973. The petitioner also alleges non-compliance of Statute 17.06 of the First Statutes which requires that any decision regarding removal or disciplinary action against a teacher of a College has to be reported to the Vice Chancellor and shall be operative only to the extent approved by the Vice Chancellor which, according to the petitioner, has not been done in the present case. It has further been claimed by the petitioner that the ad hoc arrangement already in vogue cannot be replaced by another ad hoc arrangement as has been done in the present case by replacing the petiti