226 of the Constitution challenging the validity of the appointment of respondent No.
2, appointed respondent No.
December 15.
In the meanwhile it decided that the appellant should companytinue to act till a new appointment was made.
C. Chatterjee, D. P. Singh, R. K. Garg, S. Agarwala and M. K. Ramamurthy, for the respondents.
He was at that time a Principal of another College in Bihar.
At this meeting the appellant, as an ex officio member, was present.
403 of 1961.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KAPUR, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment and order of the High Court of Patna dismissing the appellants petition under Art.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated July 19, 1961, of the Patna High Court in Misc.
4 and he was entitled to promotion under Art.
226 of the Constitution.
2 became its Chairman.
4 as Principal on the ground that the appellants appointment was never terminated and if there was any resolution by which resolution of February 23, 1958 was rescinded or cancelled, it was illegal as it was number included in the agenda to be transacted and was void because of certain provisions in the University Statute framed under the University of Bihar Act, 1951 Act 27 of 1951 , which had the force of law that the appointment of the New Principal was invalid because the appointment had to be made by the Governing Body of the College at its meeting and the power companyld number be delegated to the President or the Secretary that the appointment was number approved by the University and the appellant was a better candidate than respondent No.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
It became a degree companylege in 1945 and was affiliated to the Bihar University in 1951.
4 1 b of Statute XVI.
The respondents are the Governing Body of the Nalanda College, its President Mr. Krishna Kant Singh, its Secretary Mr. K. B. P. N. Singh and Mr. Ram Swarup Narain Sinha who has been appointed Principal of the College.
It is alleged that at an extraordinary meeting of the Governing Body of the College held on February 23, 1958 the appellant was appointed its Principal and the University were informed of this appointment as required by the University Statutes and he actually took charge of his office on July 11, 1958.
Judicial Case No.
Basudeva Prasad and Naunit Lal, for the Appellant.
On November 9, 1959, there was a change in the companystitution of the Governing Body and respondent No.
At a meeting on July 27, 1958 the appointment made on February 23, 1958 was companyfirmed.
The relevant facts of the case are these Nalanda College was founded by a private citizen in 1920.
In accordance with this resolution the President, respondent No.
In March 1953, Mr. D.P. Srivastava who was a Government servant was appointed its Principal but the Government withdrew him on February 4, 1958.
4 as the Principal of the College.
The Governing Body reconsidered the proceedings of February 23, 1958 and at a meeting on January 31, 1960, the Governing Body resolved to appoint a new Principal.
He alleges that he companyplained about this appointment to the Vice Chancellor of the Bihar University and he was, by a letter, advised by the Vice Chancellor to watch and see what happens.
These allegations were denied by the respondents.
404 of 1961.
On May 14, 1960 the Governing Body resolved to advertise the post.
At this meeting also the appellant was present and on September 26, 1960 the Governing Body resolved to readvertise the post.
Some candidates including the appellant were interviewed by the Governing Body and on December 18, 1960 it passed a resolution authorising the Chairman to make a selection from amongst the candidates who had been interviewed, and who included the appellant.
On April 18, 1961 the appellant was asked to hand over charge to the new appointee by May 6, 1961.
The petitioner thereupon filed a petition under Art.
