JUDGMENT : V.K. KHANNA, J. 1. The Petitioner, who happens to be the professor/Chairman of the Department of History (Centre of Advanced Study in History) Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh has filed this writ petition challenging the order dated 13th August, 1991 passed by the Vice-Chancellor and issued by the Deputy Registrar, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh approving that Professor Irfan Habib, Respondent No. 5, Department of History, shall continue to be the Coordinator of the Centre of the Advanced Study in History after his superannuation on 11-8-1991 till further order. 2. According to the Petitioner, the Executive Council of the University in its meeting held on 8-8-1968 resolved to upgrade the status of the Department of History to the centre of advanced study in history. True copy of the resolution of the Executive Council has been annexed as Annexure 1 to the writ petition In view of the definition of the 'Department' in Section 2(3) of the Aligarh Muslim University Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act") the Department of History will include the centre of Studies i.e. the Centre of Advanced Study in History. From the year 1968 up to the year 1988 the practice continued that the head of the Department of History was to function as ex officio Director/Co-ordinator. Later on these guidelines were changed and it was laid down that the Senior most professor belonging to the Thrust area shall function as co-ordinator of the Centre. The latest guide lines issued by the University Grants Commissioner provided that the senior most person in the Thrust area concerned shall function as a coordinator of the Advanced study centre in History till his superannuation. It was also provided that if such a person is at the verge of the age of superannuation the next senior most person in the Department concern shall function as Coordinator. Besides this, it was also provided that in case the programme co-ordinator retires in the middle of any one phase of five years duration, he may continue as a programme co-ordinator for the remaining period of the particular phase of the programme. It was also provided that in a special case if the co-ordinator is available after retirement, he may continue to function as co-ordinator of the Centre even after particular phase of the programme is over. It was also provided that in a special case if the co-ordinator is available after retirement, he may continue to function as co-ordinator of the Centre even after particular phase of the programme is over. According to the Petitioner the aforesaid two conditions laid down in the latest guideline entitles a person to continue as a co-ordinator even after his superannuation is totally illegal being against the Statute of the Aligarh Muslim University. The precise argument is that as per the Statute 29(9)(b) the Executive Council may, in the interest of the University, re-employ a teacher for such period as it may deem fit and on such terms and conditions as it may prescribe, provided that no teacher shall be retained in service beyond the age of 65 years. However, under the proviso it has been clearly provided that during the period of re-employment a teacher shall not be given any administrative responsibility. According to the Petitioner the Co-ordinator of the Centre of Advance Study of History performs several administrative functions and thus in the view of the specific provisions of the Statute 29(9)(b) he can not act as co-ordinator as he cannot be permitted to perform administrative functions after his retirement. It has also been urged that the guide lines issued by the University Grants Commission can not over ride the statutes of the University It has been prayed that the impugned order dated 13-8-1991 is, therefore, liable to be quashed and that the Respondent 5 be restrained from functioning as Co-ordinator of the Centre of Advanced Study in History in Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh. 3. In so far as the Respondents are concerned, they have taken up a case that the centre of Advanced Study in History has not been established either under the Act, statutes or Ordinances and thus is not a Department of the University. It has been argued that the administrative functions which a retired professor can not perform under statute 29 (9)(b) are the functions which have been assigned to the authorities or officers which have been designated either under the Act, statute or the ordinances. It has been argued that the administrative functions which a retired professor can not perform under statute 29 (9)(b) are the functions which have been assigned to the authorities or officers which have been designated either under the Act, statute or the ordinances. Co-ordinator of the centre of the advanced study in History is not one of the authorities or the officers mentioned either under the Act, Statute or the Ordinances and thus would not be deemed to perform any administrative functions as contemplated under the Statute 29 (9)(b) of the Statutes. In the alternative it has been urged that the functions of the co-ordinator are principally for doing academic and research work and he has not been assigned any administrative responsibility as contemplated under Statute 29 (9)(b) of the Statutes. In the end it has also been urged that in the matter relating to the educational institutions if two interpretations are possible, the court will ordinarily be reluctant to accept the interpretation which would upset and reverse the long course of action and decision taken by such educational authorities and would accept the interpretation made by such educational authorities. Reliance has been place on the Supreme Court case of Dr. Uma Kant Vs. Dr. Bhika Lal Jain and others, AIR 1991 SC 2272 . 4. The first question which falls for determination in this case is as to whether the Centre of Advanced Study in History has been established under the provisions of the Aligarh Muslim University Act or the Statutes and the Ordinances framed there under. Section 2(e) of the Act defines "department". Department means a department of studies and includes a centre of Studies established by the ordinances. The ordinances have been produced before us and they no where provide for the Centre of the advanced study in History. It is thus clear that Centre of Advanced Study in History cannot be termed to be a department u/s 2(e) of the Act It will be pertinent to note that chapter 1 of the ordinances under the heading 'Factuality of Social Sciences' provides for centre of West Asian Studies. It is thus absolutely clear that neither the Statute nor the ordinances have established Centre of Advanced Study in History. 5. It is thus absolutely clear that neither the Statute nor the ordinances have established Centre of Advanced Study in History. 5. It has now to be considered as to what is exactly the position to the Centre of Advanced study in History and the position of the co-ordinater of the aforesaid centre. The letter dated 30th May 1968 sent by the University Grants Commission to the Registrar of the University makes it clear that on the basis of the recommendations made by the Advisory committee on the Centers of Advanced study appointed by the University Grants Commission and the report made by the Expert Committee which visited the Aligarh Muslim University in April, 1968 agreed to recognise the Department of History as a Centre of Advanced Study and agreed to provide certain grants for that purpose. It is thus clear that the University Grants Commission was recognising certain Departments in Educational Institutions as centers of Advanced study in pursuance of the recommendations made by the Advisory Committee on the centers of Advance study. The University Grants Commission had provided from time to time certain guidelines and had laid down conditions on which the grant was given by the University Grants Commission. The University had accepted the proposal of the University Grants Commission as would be evident from the resolution passed by the Executive council of the University and thus the work in the Department of History and the programme initiated by the University Grants Commission was being carried on. In a nutshell it could be said that the Centre of the Advance study in History is a research project which is being financed solely by the University Grants Commission and which is being carried on in accordance with the guide lines which are being issued by the University Grants Commission from time to time and the University has agreed to take the grant and follow the guidelines which are being issued by the University Grants Commission from time to time. The Coordinator has also to be appointed in accordance with guide lines which are provided by the University Grants Commission. It is not the case of the Petitioner before us that the co-ordinator has been appointed in contravention of the guide lines issued by the University Grants Commission. The Coordinator has also to be appointed in accordance with guide lines which are provided by the University Grants Commission. It is not the case of the Petitioner before us that the co-ordinator has been appointed in contravention of the guide lines issued by the University Grants Commission. The case, however, is that guidelines issued by the University Grants Commissioner are in contravention of the provisions of the Statute 29(9)(b) of the Statutes of the Aligarh Muslim University. 6. The crucial questions which falls for determination in this case is as to whether the Coordinator of the Centre of Advanced Study in History who happens to be retired professor and who has been re-employed is performing administrative functions as contemplated under Statute 29 (9)(b) of the Statutes of the Aligarh Muslim University. 7. Aligarh Muslim University Act has been enacted as an Act to incorporate a teaching and residential Muslim University at Aligarh. The primary function which is thus carried in the University is of teaching and for that purpose the University employs teachers as well as non teaching staff. Teachers of the University under the Act, Statutes and the Ordinances besides being given the responsibility of carrying on the teaching work have also been assigned with the work of administrative responsibilities. Section 16 of the Act provides for as to who will be the officers of the University and also specifies that such other officers as may be declared by the Statutes to be the officers of the University. Section 22 of the Act defines the Authorities of the University and also lays down in Sub-section (4) that such other authorities as may be declared by the Statutes to be authorities of the University shall also be included in the list of authorities. It is thus clear that the administrative functions which have to be performed in connection with carrying on the work of the University have been well defined under the Act, Statutes and the Ordinances and have been entrusted to various authorities and officers who have been designated therein. It is thus clear that the administrative functions which have to be performed in connection with carrying on the work of the University have been well defined under the Act, Statutes and the Ordinances and have been entrusted to various authorities and officers who have been designated therein. In our opinion, when the proviso in Statutes 29 (9)(b) lays down that during the period of re-employment a teacher shall not be given any administrative responsibility, the clear intention was that after superannuation a teacher will only be employed for the purposes of teaching and no work of administrative responsibility as contemplated under the Act, Statutes or the Ordinances will be given to such a re-employed teacher. The Words 'administrative responsibility' in our opinion have to be given this meaning inasmuch as if the words 'administrative responsibility' are construed in a broad sense, even teacher while performing his job in some sense or the other performs work which involves administrative responsibility. The words 'administrative responsibilities' were being used not in a broad sense but in connection with the various functions of administrative responsibilities which have been specifically entrusted to the teachers under the Act, Statute or the ordinances. For example, the teachers of the University can become chairman/Dean of Faculties of the Department, Dean of Smients Welfare, provost, Proctor etc. It is these posts which can not be held by persons who have been reemployed under Statute 29 (9)(b) of the Statutes. The post of a coordinator is not one of the posts which have been mentioned either in the Act, Statutes or the ordinances carrying any work of administrative responsibilities and thus, in our opinion, there is no bar in a teacher who has been re-employed under Statute 29 (9)(b) of the statutes of the University in even discharging work carrying administrative responsibility attached with the post of co-ordinator. As has been held, the co-ordinator is appointed in accordance with the guide lines laid down by the University Grants Commission. The University for receiving the grant has to follow those guide lines. The University is not giving any work of administrative responsibility under the Act, Statutes or the ordinances. There is thus, in our opinion, no contravention of the provisions of Statute 29 (9)(b) of the Statutes. 8. The University for receiving the grant has to follow those guide lines. The University is not giving any work of administrative responsibility under the Act, Statutes or the ordinances. There is thus, in our opinion, no contravention of the provisions of Statute 29 (9)(b) of the Statutes. 8. In view of what we have held, it is not necessary to go into the question as to whether the co-ordinator in fact is carrying on administrative functions or not. 9. For the reasons stated above the present writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.