Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. We have taken little pains to examine the two earier decisions of the Supreme Court sought to be distinguished and the authority of which is said tc have been considerably shaken as said by the Andhra Pradesh High Court and with due deference to the learned Judges of the said Court we venture to disagree with them and take a different view. We shall presently indicate our reasons for the disagreement but before that, we would like to deal with another case of the Supreme Court referred tp in the Full Bench case presently. The Full Bench in paragraph 87 has again referred to the case of P. R. Jodh v. A. L. Pandey, (1965) 2 SCR 713 where a writ against a private college was issued, in support of their view. This case was relied upon by Mr. Setalvad appearing for the appellant before the Supreme Court in Vidya Ram's case (Supra) which was considered and distinguished by thier Lordships of the Supreme Court in some detail. In paragraph 13 of the report the contention raised on behalf of the learned Counsel that that Court had sub silentio sanctioned the issue of a, writ under Article 226 to quash an order terminating services of a teacher passed by a college similarly situated and, therefore, the fact that the College or the managing committee was not a. statutory body was no hindrance to the High Court issuing the writ prayed for by the appellant was repelled on the ground that "this Court expressly stated in the judgment that no such contention was raised in the High Court and so it cannot be allowed to be raised in this Court. Apart from that on the facts also the case of P. R. Jodh is quite distinguishable. There a lecturer who was dismissed by the Governing Body of a College affiliated to the Saugor University challenged the dismissal on the ground of violation of the rules of natural justice and sought protection of the provisions of the "College Code"."

The Supreme Court held that the provisions of Ordinance 20, known as "College Code" had the force of law and conferred legal rights on the teachers of affiliated colleges which was intra vires of the powers of the University contained in Section 12 read with Section 4 (6) of the University Act and, therefore, it was incorrect to contend that the "College Code" merely regulates the relationship between the University and the affiliated colleges. The provisions of the Code relating to the security of tenure teachers properly fell within the statutory power of affiliation granted to the University under the Act.