The U.P. State Universities Act,1973 authorises the State Govt. to chargesheet a College
Management on the receipts of complaints and if the Government is not satisfied with the explanation, to suspend the College Management and appoint a controller for the maximum period of two years (sec 56 to 60). Here several things needs clarification.
1. The universities are autonomous bodies. The Govt. of U.P. does not take the concerned
University into confidence. Is this correct ?
2. The govt. chargesheets a college Management and also act as an Enquiry Officer and also
takes an action. Is it legal ?
3. The state Govt. often appoints the District Collector as Controller who is already an over
burdened officer. Then, the adminstration of a district and adminstration of a college needs
different qualities. Is appointment of a Dist. Magistrate as a Controller justifiable ?
4. No where the rights and duties of a Controller, who is only a working Managing Committee,
have been mentioned with the result that a temporary controller often takes far reaching
policy decision, such as
i) To transfer‘several accounts, amounting to lakhs of rupees, from a scheduled nationalised
bank to a district level Co-operative Bank.
ii) To purchase a luxury car which has no use for the college.
iii) To construct new buildings worth crores of rupees from the college funds without
completing formalities, as per rule of the U.G.C. Universities and colleges etc. Even
the laws pertaining to Urban development like ALIGARH VIKASH PRADHIKARAN
were also not followed o iv) To allow Principal to make his residence a super luxury house.in the college campus.
v) Due to over work of the District Magistrate cum controller. The Principal became
dictator and went as far as illegally with-holding payments and salaries of the teachers
and not sending pension papers of the staff to the Director of Higher Education and
recruit new employees fraudulantly.
vi) The Principal became bold not to provide informations under RIGHT TO
INFORMATION ACT inspite of half a dozen time appearances before the Hon’ble
STATE INFORMATION COMMISSION, LUCKNOW, with their clear instruction to
vii) The suspended Management had charge sheeted the Principal and appointed an
Enquiry committee. The report of the Enquiry committee and also the report of the
Director of Higher Education,U.P., which proved the very serious charges have
been shelved by the Controller for no legal and justifiable reasons.
Such instances can be multiplied. If required connected documents can be provided.
To hand over the charge of the college to the suspended Management after a period
of time, as if the culprit has completed the period of imprisonment, is it fair ? Why
the election could not be completed in 2-3 months and charges handed over to the
new Managing Committee?
Bimal Kumar Khemani