The appellant opposed the writ application by companytending that he possesses the requisite qualifications and, inter alia, averred in the return made to rule that the petitioners before the High Court were his students and on account of ill motive, they had filed the application challenging the appointment of the appellant as Director.
From the Judgment and order dated 3.6.1983 of the High Court of Pun jab and Haryana in Writ Petition No.
The first one is against the decision of the High Court in a writ application for quo warranto filed by respondents 2 to 4 while the second one is against the dismissal of a writ petition filed by the appellant before the High Court challenging his reversion.
The short facts are that the appellant was appointed as a Professor of Ayurvedic Medicines under the Punjab Government.
2, 3 and 4, once upon a time students of the appellant came before the High Court asking for a writ of quo warranto challenging the appellants appointment as Director on promotion on the plea that he did number possess the qualification prescribed by the Punjab Ayurvedic Department Class I and Class Il Rules, 1963.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.
8623 24 of 1983.
Later, he was appointed as Deputy Director from which post he was further promoted as Director.
The writ petition was filed soon after the appellant was promoted to the post of Director, and during the pendency of the writ petition the order of reversion as referred to above had been passed.
By order dated 21.1 .1981 he was reverted to the post of Deputy Director.
On 3 1st October, 1987, the appellant has superannuated.
K. Bagga, C.M. Nayar, Mrs. Manik Karanjawala, R. Karanjawala and Mrs. Meenakshi Arora for the Respondents.
P. Rao and P.D. Sharma for the Appellant.
The respondent Nos.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RANGANATH MISRA, J. These appeals are by special leave and are directed against two separate judgments of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
1794 of 1980.
