Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:29396 Court No. - 10 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 2610 of 2025 Petitioner :- Committee Of Management, Sri Swami Brahmatej Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya And Another Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Alok Shukla,Prabhakar Awasthi Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C. Hon'ble Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J. 1. The petitioner before this Court is Committee of Management of Sri Swami Brahmatej Sanskrit Mahavidyalaya, Sheshpur, Khutahani, District- Jaunpur. 2. Sri Prabhakar Awasthi, learned counsel for petitioner submits that notice dated 17.01.2025 was issued by Deputy Direction of Education (Sanskrit), U.P. at Prayagraj and a consequential notice dated 23.01.2025 by Joint Director of Education was issued to petitioner to summon documents in regard to appointment of Smt. Girisha, the Principal of institution, raising some doubts on her appointment. 3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that appointment of Principal was approved by the University, therefore, notice could be issued by the University only and in such matters, department of Education has no role and, therefore, he has approached this Court to challenge the notice being issued by the authority who has no power to issue such notice. 4. Ms. Shruti Malviya, learned Brief Holder for State submits that the notice is issued only to verify the documents in regard to appointment of Smt. Girisha, Principal as well as of Sri Sunil Kumar Mishra, Sri Brijesh Kumar Pandey and Sri Prabhat Kumar Shukla were other employees and Committee of Management can always supply the documents to verify allegation even any objection to the jurisdiction may also be considered. Affected persons are not before this Court. 5. I have considered the above submission and perused the record. 6. At this stage, the Court is not entering whether the notice is issued is contrary to rules, however, petitioner i.e. Committee of Management has liberty to raise such issue before the authority who has issued notice and it will incumbent upon him to decide the said issue at first instance. 7. This Court has observed in Ashok Kumar Dwivedi Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2025:AHC:6788 that in case, any complaint is filed that should be accompanied by an affidavit of complainant, wherein it should be mentioned that in case, objections raised by complainant are found to be untrue or vague, criminal as well as civil action may be taken against him, therefore, the respondent concerned will also comply the said direction and will sought such affidavit from the complainant before proceeding further. 8. In present case, the University has approved the appointment, therefore, concerned respondent will also issue a notice to Registrar concern of University also and their stand may also be taken note on facts as well as on law. If reply is filed to the notice within two weeks, the consideration of it be concluded within four weeks thereafter. 9. Accordingly, writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid observation. Order Date :- 3.3.2025 P. Pandey Digitally signed by :- PUSHPENDRA PANDEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad