CHANDRASHEKARALAH, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner is a law teacher in the Law College run by the second respondent Management. According to the petitioner since he is of the status of the reader in law in the said college, as per the statute of the Bangalore University the Management is required to consider his name for appointment to the post of principal; but, on the other hand, the Management issued a notification calling for applications to fill up the post of Principal in the newspaper which according to him is not correct. ( 2 ) TODAY the petitioner has filed another application seeking for quashing another notification published in the newspaper calling for application during the pendency of this Writ Petition. In support of his contention the petitioner has taken me through certain statutes governing the service conditions of the teachers in the colleges affiliated to Bangalore University. The Law College run by the second respondent Management is one of the affiliated colleges of Bangalore university. It is not disputed that the petitioner is appointed by the second respondent Management as a lecturer in the law college. Now the question that arise for consideration is; whether the petitioner is qualified for appointment as a principal as per the statutes of the university. Statute 24. 3 reads as follows:-"the senior most teacher in an Affiliated College of the status of Professor or Reader shall be chosen for appointment as the principal". From the reading of the above it is clear that the post of principal is to be filled up from among the persons who are of the status of professors or Readers. Chapter XXIV of the statutes provides for the classification and qualifications of teachers in Affiliated Colleges. Clause 4 of the Annexure to the said chapter reads as follows:-4. Faculty of law: the following shall be the qualifications for recognition subject of for teacher in the faculty of law: professor: A First Class Master's Degree in Law of a recognised University with 5 years teaching/professional experience. A second class Master's Degree in law of recognised university with 10 years of teaching/professional experience. Faculty of law: the following shall be the qualifications for recognition subject of for teacher in the faculty of law: professor: A First Class Master's Degree in Law of a recognised University with 5 years teaching/professional experience. A second class Master's Degree in law of recognised university with 10 years of teaching/professional experience. Reader: A master's Degree in Law of a recognised University with 2 years teaching/professional experience or II class Degree in Law with 7 years teaching/professional experience, from the reading of the above, it is clear that certain qualification has been prescribed for appointment of Professor and a Reader. But, mere possessing the qualification referred to above does not mean that the person who possessed that qualification automatically becomes a Professor or a Reader since the said posts are to be filled up as provided under the statutes. In the instant case, the petitioner has not been appointed as a Reader by the Management. If that is so, under Statute No. 24. 3 the petitioner is not eligible for appointment as Principal since he is neither a Professor nor a reader. Therefore, the petitioner has no locus standl whatsoever to challenge the notification issued by the Management calling for application to fill up the post of principal. ( 3 ) LEARNED Counsel for the respondent Management submits that in the respondent's Law College there is no person who is qualified to be appointed as a principal. If that is so, the only course open for the Management is to call for application to fill up the post of principal. The University also having taken into consideration that there are no qualified persons to be appointed as Principal directed the Management to appoint a Principal by direct recruitment. Therefore, I find no illegality in calling for application by notification published in the newspaper to fill up the post of Principal of the law college. ( 4 ) THE petitioner in this Writ Petition has also sought for adirection to the University to initiate penal action against the management for having violated the conditions of affiliation and statutes of Bangalore University. The petitioner has not brought any specific instances to the notice of this Court to issue direction to initiate proceedings as against the respondent Management. The petitioner has not brought any specific instances to the notice of this Court to issue direction to initiate proceedings as against the respondent Management. Sri bhagavan, learned Counsel appearing for the University also submits that till now the respondent Institution has not violated any of the conditions or statutes of the Bangalore University. Under these circumstances, I find no substance in the argument of the petitioner so as to grant the relief as prayed for in this Writ Petition. ( 5 ) HENCE, the following order-Writ Petition is rejected.