LexMARATHWADA UNIVERSITY versus SESHRAO BALWANT RAO CHAVAN
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A MARATHWADA UNIVERSITY v. SESHRAO BALWANT RAO CHAVAN APRIL 13, 1989 B [K. JAGANNATHA SHETTY AND KULDIP SINGH, JJ.) Marathwada University Act, 1974: Sections 8, 10, 11, 19, 23, 24, --, 27 and 84-Vice Chancellor of every university-Conscious keeper and constitutional ruler-Responsible for over all administration of academic affairs-To act firmly to put down indiscipline and malprac- C lice-Executive Council has power of removal 'to 'regulate the work and conduct of the officers'-Whether implies power to take disciplinary action. Administrative Law: Delegation of power-When statute pres- cribes a particular body to exercise power-That body alone and none D else can exercise it-Unless it is delegated-Ratification-Cannot cure an ultra vires action. The respondent was a Deputy Registrar of the appellant- ~ U niversity. As the Controller of Examinations had proceeded on leave -4 the respondent was discharging the duties of Controller of Examina- E lions. A complaint alleging that the respondent had delayed the pay- ment of the bills of an outstation party who had printed the question - papers for the annual examination was received by the University. The • Executive Council of the University appointed an Enquiry Officer to hold an enquiry to find out whether the bills were deliberately kept pending with any ulterior motive. The Enquiry Officer gave a clean chit ,:. F to the respondent as to his conduct in discharging the duties as Control- ler of Examinations. The Executive Council of the University did not take any decision on the report of the Enquiry Officer, but entrusted the question to the Vice-Challcellor who was 'present at the meeting. The Vice-Chancellor G directed a departmental enquiry against the respondent and appointed an advocate as the Enquiry Officer. The Enquiry Officer by his report held the respondent guilty of all the charges levelled against him. The Vice Chancellor after giving a show cause notice and considering the reply of the respondent, dismissed him from service. H The respondent moved the High Court under Article 226 chat- 454 MARATHWADA UNIVERSITY v. S.B.R. CHAVAN 455 y lenging his dismissal. When the writ-petition was taken up for hearing the High Court directed the entire matter to be placed before the Execu- A tive Council for an appropriate decision. The Executive Council con- sidered the matter at its meeting and passed a resolution. ratifying the action taken by the Vice-Chancellor, and confirming the dismissal of ,, ~ the respondent. At the final disposal of the writ petition, the High Court examined the matter on merits and held that the action taken by the B Vice-Chancellor being without any authority or power, these defects 'ff could not be cured by ratification by the Executive Council in its subse- quentresolution. The High Court accordingly quashed the departmen- tat proceedings taken aj!ainst the respondent, and also the order of termination of his services . • c In the appeal to this Court, it was contended on behalf of the ' ·t- University : (i)That on a true construction of the several provisions or the marathwada University Act, 1974, the termination of services of the respondent cannot be assailed for want of power or jurisdiction on the part or the Vice-Chancellor, and (2) that if the order was defective or without authority, the ratification by the Executive Council had D rendered it immune from any challenge. Dismissing the Appeal, the Court, + HELD: I. The Vice-Chancellor in every univerliity is the con- .. scions keeper of the University and the constitutional ruler. He is the E principal executive and academic officer of the University. He is - entrusted with the responsibility of overall administration of academic as well as non-academic affairs. [464A-B] JI, 2. As the principal executive officer the Vice-Chancellor also car- ries .with him an implied power, the magisterial power. This power is F essential for him to maintain .domest!c discipline in the academic and .non-academic affairs. In a wide variety of situations in the refotionship /" of tutor and pupil, he has to act firmly and promptly to put down indiscipline and malpractice. It may not be illegitimate if he could call to aid his implied powers and also emergency powers to deal with all ~ ·such situations. [464D-EJ G _,,- A!;r, 3. The Marathwada University Act, .1974 confers both express and implied powers on the Vice-Ch
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.