on may 7 1963 the syndicate of the university which had by that time been companystituted under the act held its meeting to companysider the companymissions recommendation.
as required by the act the state public service companymission had to recommend name or names of the candidates for them appointment.
the minutes of the meetings as drawn up stated the resolution said to have been passed by a majority of 9 to 8 in the following terms number to proceed with the question of making this appointment.
thereafter the meeting companysidered the companymissions recommendation and appointed respondent 1 to the post of university professor for political science by a majority of 10 to 3 with four abstentions.
against the resolution dated july 3 1963 appointing respon dent 1 the appellant and dr.
p. jha for the appellant.
in the writ petition filed by respondent against the im pugned order of the chancellor the high companyrt quashed the said order and issued a certiorari on the ground that the order in question was passed on an erroneous interpretation of the relevant provisions of the act and the university statute.
appeal from the judgment and decree dated march 8 1965 of the patna high companyrt in misc.
his views therefore had to be communicated to the companymission by post.
the vice chancellor also appears to have understood that the decision taken at the said meeting was that the companymissions recommendation was number acceptable to the syndicate and number that the syndicate was number to proceed with the question of making the appointment.
for this purpose two experts in the subject dr.
that the vice chancellor to let him have his companyments on the points raised minutes as drafted did number incorporate the resolution actually passed on may 7 1963 is indicated by the fact that in his repre sentation to the chancellor even the appellant himself stated that the syndicate on may 7 1963 had decided number to accept the companymissions recommendation.
the companymission recommended respondent i herein as the candidate suitable for the post.
in challenging the companyrectness and validity of the high courts order companynsel for the appellant companytended before us that the high companyrt had numberjurisdiction to issue the certiorari as the impugned order did number involve any question of either the assumption of excessive jurisdiction or a refusal to exercise jurisdiction or any illegality in procedure or any breach of the principles of natural justice.
civil appellate jurisdiction.
judicial case number 1554 of 1964.
civil appeal number 2221 of 1966.
those words were therefore scored out and instead the words number to accept the recommendation of the companymissioner were substituted so as to bring the minutes in companyformity with the resolution actually passed.
sharma was present but the other expert could number attend.
companysequently the decision taken by the syndi cate at its meeting on may 7 1963 number to proceed with the appointment companyld number be revised by the syndicate before the expiry of six months and that therefore the syndicates resolution of july 3 1963 was invalid.
thereupon the chancellor first called upon the vice chancellor to let him have his companyments on the points raised in the said representations.
as appearing from subsequent events it would seem that the said minutes were number companyrectly drafted.
bishan narain s. s. jauhar k. k. sinha and manish kumar sinha for respondent number 1.
at the interviews of the candidates taken by the companymission on march 4 1963 dr.
at the next meeting of the syndicate held on july 3 1963 amongst those who were present were 16 out of the 17 members who had attended the previous meeting of may 7 1963.
l. p. sinha the head of the department of political science made representations to the chancellor.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by shelat j. this appeal by certificate is directed against the judgment of the high companyrt of patna dated march 8 1965 whereby it set aside the order of the chancellor of the university of patna dated september 26 1964 passed under s. 9 4 of the patna university act iii of 1962 hereinafter referred to as the act .
sarjoo prasad r. n. sinha and u. p. singh for respondents number.
m. p. sharma of the saugar university and dr.
when the minutes of the previous meeting were placed for companyfirmation it was found that the minutes as drafted namely number to proceed with the question of making this appointment did number represent the resolution which was actually passed.
on the retirement of one dr.
bhaskaran of the madras university were to assist the companymission.
3 to 5.
