Dr. Suman Agarwal vs U.P. Higher Education Service Commission and Others

B.M. Lal and B. Dixit, JJ.—Sri A. Kumar for Petitioner and Sri B.B. Baghel representing Respondent No. 1 Commission, are heard.

The only grievance made by the Petitioner in this petition is that joint requests made by the Petitioner Dr. Suman Agarwal and Respondent No. 5 - Km. Asha Rani for their mutual appointment/posting is repelled arbitrarily.

This fact is not disputed that Petitioner Dr. Suman Agarwal and Km. Asha Rani - Respondent No. 5 both have filed representations to the Chairman, U.P. Higher Education Service Commission, Allahabad (Respondent No. 1) to the effect that they have no objection if they are mutually appointed/posted, i.e., if Km. Asha Rani is appointed at Vikramajit Singh Santana Dharam College, Kanpur In place of the Petitioner and Petitioner is appointed at Shaw Saran Degree College. Allahabad where Km. Asha Rani has been recommended by the Commission.

However, as pointed out above, the Respondent - Commission repelled the above submission, inter alia, on the ground that in the absence of any statutory provision to that effect, the joint prayer of the Petitioner and Respondent No. 5 cannot be accepted.

In this connection, we may point out that even if (here is no specific provision in (his regard, as per settled proposition of law, every authority which has power to do an act, has all necessary implied powers which may arise or which are necessary for the exercise of administration of justice provided that exercise of Implied power does not violate any statutory rule. The rules are to facilitate the administration and not to obstruct it.

Admittedly, in the instant case, there is no specific law that such relief cannot be granted. All the same, in the absence of any such statutory provision, considering facts and circumstances on the each case, it is expected of the Commission-Respondent No. l to exercise its discretion to facilitate in such matters of mutual posting/appointment provided the management of the institutions where such posting/appointments are to be made, have no objection.

In view of the discussion aforesaid, we direct the Commission-Respondent No. 1 to reconsider the Petitioner''s and Respondent No. 5 - Km. Asha Rani''s applications for their mutual posting/appointments expeditiously in the light of the observations made above.

With the above direction, this petition is finally disposed of.

A copy of this order be issued to the learned Counsel on payment of usual charges