On a consideration of the matter, we think we should decline to interfere with the judgment of the High Court.


2. However, Sri U. R. Lalit, Sr. Advocate, submitted that certain observations in the judgment as to the lack of the power in the Governing Council to ratify the action of the Principle may not be supportable and at all events unnecessary to support the conclusion reached and that, therefore, those observations may be deleted. We think we should accept the submission and the question of correctness of the these observations is left open. Sri Lalit also said that the management should be free to initiate fresh disciplinary proceedings. The High Court at paragraph 14 of the appellate judgment has reserved this liberty. It is, however, made clear that nothing in the order of the High Court nor the dismissal of this petition here should come in the way of either the Principle or the Governing Council, within respective fields of their powers, to initiate such fresh proceedings as they may consider appropriate in regard to the misconduc

t attributed to the first-respondent. 3. Subject as aforesaid the Special Leave Petition is dismissed.