S. R. NAYAK, J. ( 1 ) BOTH the writ appeals are filed by Dr. A. Mukkarram Syed Fazlullah (for short hereinafter referred to as "the writ appellant) and they are directed against the common order of the learned single Judge dated 23-3-1998 in W. P. No. 28337 of 1997 and W. P. 30790 of 1997. ( 2 ) ALONG with the above two writ petitions, another Writ Petition No. 24537 of 1997 was also dubbed and heard together and they were disposed of by a common order. ( 3 ) THE background facts leading to the filing of the above writ petitions are as follows: ( 4 ) THE Oriental Urdu College (Evening) situated at Himayatnagar, Hyderabad represented by its Secretary and Correspondent (herein after referred to as "the college") is the second respondent in W. A. No. 1530 of 1998 and respondent No. 3 in W. A. 1291 of 1999. The Management of the College after getting necessary approval from the competent authority issued a notification calling for applications from the eligible candidates for appointment to the post of three lecturers in Urdu and one lecturer in Arabic. As many as 23 candidates applied for the post. The Selection Committee constituted by the Management of the College interviewed the candidates and prepared a selection list on 29-8-1996. Sri Syed Baba Moinuddin Quadri (herein after shortly referred to as sri Quadri ) who was also an applicant for the post of lecturer in Urdu and who was also selected for the post and placed at serial No. 6 is respondent No. 3 in WA No. 1530 of 1998 and respondent No. 1 in WA No. 1291 of 1999 along with certain others who were not selected for the post filed Writ Petition No. 24440 of 1996 in this court alleging that some of the candidates who are selected and placed in the select list have produced false certificates. The learned single Judge by his order dated 10-2-1997 allowed the writ petition and set aside the entire selection. The learned single Judge by his order dated 10-2-1997 allowed the writ petition and set aside the entire selection. That led to the filing of the WA No. 685 of 1997 and a Division Bench of this Court disposed of that writ appeal by its judgment and order dated 25-6-1997, which reads as follows:"the proper order, on the facts of the instant case, in our view, would be to observe that it would be open to the fourth respondent to advertise afresh or to proceed to make recruitment from Ihe panel in question after excluding the names of such persons who are found to have used false certificates or to decide upon the desirability of recruitment by any other mode. The above, however, shall not deny to any person, whose name is excluded from the panel on the ground that he has used false certificate to question the same in accordance with law. " ( 5 ) AS permitted by the Division Bench, it seems, the Selection Committee constituted by the Management of the College vide its proceedings dated 3-7-1997 selected four candidates for appointment to the post of lecturer and in that list Sri Quadri was placed at serial No. 2 but the writ appellant was not included in the select list and that list was forwarded to the Director of Collegiate Education for approval as required under Rule 7 (3) of the Andhra Pradesh Educational Institutions (Establishment, Recognition, Administration and Control of Institutions of Higher Education) Rules, 1987 (for short "the rules" ). The Director by his proceedings dated 22-9-1997 accorded permission to appoint only the candidates at serial Nos. 1, 3 and 4 and refused to accord permission as regards Sri Quadri. Being aggrieved by the said action of the Director, Sri Quadri filed W. P. No. 24537 of 1997 praying the following relief:i) "declaring the action of the 1st respondent in not approving the petitioner s selection along with the candidates who are selected and whose names are forwarded for approval by the 2nd respondent especially when the selection of the candidates who are shown below the petitioner in the select list is approved as illegal, arbitrary and offends articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. II) direct the first respondent to approve the selection of the petitioner for appointment as lecturer in Urdu in the 2nd respondent college from 22-9-1997, the date on which this selection was approved and grant all consequential benefits;" ( 6 ) IT appears that in the meanwhile the writ appellant has made two representations to the Director complaining about his non-selection to the post of lecturer in Urdu. The Director on consideration of those representations and other materials placed before him, by his proceedings dated 26-9-1997, directed the Correspondent of the College to reexamine the case of the writ appellant and submit necessary proposals to him for taking further action in the matter. While so directing, the Director in his order has opined that exclusion of the writ appellant from consideration on the ground that he submitted false certificate is not justified nor correct having regard to the revised certificate dated 23-9-1996 issued by the Principal, Oxford Cooperative Junior College, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad. Challenging the above proceedings of the Director, Sri Quadri also filed one more writ petition that being W. P. No. 30790 of 1997 seeking quashing of the above proceedings of the Director dated 26-9-1997. The writ appellant filed W. P. 28337 of 1997 in which he prayed for the following relief:i) declaring that the petitioner is fully qualified and eligible to be appointed as lecturer in Urdu in 2nd respondent college; ii) declare that the third respondent is not eligible to be appointed as lecturer in Urdu in second respondent s college; and iii) consequently direct the second respondent to implement the order of the 1st respondent in proceedings Rcno. 1 862/pc. 11-4/97, dated 26-9-1997 by sending the proposals to the first respondent for appointment of the petitioner to the post of lecturer in Urdu in second respondents college. " ( 7 ) THE learned Judge clubbed all the three writ petitions and disposed of the same by the common judgment and order impugned in these writ appeals. The material portion of the order which has a bearing on the decision-making in these writ appeals reads as follows:"i have considered the matter with reference to the respective contentions. The Director of Collegiate Education is the approving authority and is required to consider whether the process adopted by the Selection Committee is in accordance with the Rules or not. The material portion of the order which has a bearing on the decision-making in these writ appeals reads as follows:"i have considered the matter with reference to the respective contentions. The Director of Collegiate Education is the approving authority and is required to consider whether the process adopted by the Selection Committee is in accordance with the Rules or not. It would not be open for the authority to remit the matter for being considered afresh to the Selection Committee in view of the deserving nature of the candidature of a particular candidate. The selection of candidates is purely the discretion of the Selection Committee and it would not be appropriate for the approving authority to interfere in the selection process unless the same is tainted by malafides. In this case, the service certificate filed by Sri Fazlullah was found to be non-genuine and therefore, his case was rightly discarded. If the rejection is sought to be interfered with by the authorities, then there would be nothing before the Selection Authority except to obey the directions of the approving authority. Such an interference is uncalled for when power is delegated to the selection authorities to exercise their skill and ability and select appropriate and meritorious candidates. Admittedly, in the instant case, Sri Fazlullah has produced a non-genuine certificate and therefore, his case was discarded. I have also perused the experience certificates produced by Sri Fazlullah and I do not like to comment on those certificates. Suffice it to say that the Selection Committee rightly rejected the case of Sri Fazlullah on the ground that he produced non-genuine service certificates. Therefore, the only person who is available to be selected is Sri Syed Baba Moinuddin Quadri along with other three persons who secured merit ranking and quite rightly, his name was sent for approval in letter dated 3-7-1997. Under these circumstances, it would not be open for the authorities to again direct the selection committee to reconsider the matter observing that Sri Fazlullah s case is deserving one as found by the Joint Director. I have perused the merit list of the candidates prepared by the Selection Committee. Sri Fazlullah was granted 10 marks for experience. If those marks are deleted, he would not get merit ranking in the selection list. Therefore, the steps taken by the Management cannot be said to be illegal or contrary to the Rules. I have perused the merit list of the candidates prepared by the Selection Committee. Sri Fazlullah was granted 10 marks for experience. If those marks are deleted, he would not get merit ranking in the selection list. Therefore, the steps taken by the Management cannot be said to be illegal or contrary to the Rules. Since the service certificate of Sri Fazlullah has been discarded as the same was found to be non-genuine, Sri Fazlullah has no right to claim the marks for service certificate. ( 8 ) HAVING so opined the learned Judge disposed of the writ petitions with the following directions:under these circumstances, the proceedings dated 26-9-1997 are quashed and there shall be a direction to the respondent, namely, the Director of Collegiate Education to consider the recommendations made by the Institution vide letter dated 3-7-1997 and consider the candidature of the petitioner Sri Syed Baba Moinuddin Quadri and pass appropriate orders within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. W. P. No. 28337 of 1997 fails and it is accordingly dismissed. W. P. No. 30790 of 1997 is allowed and in view of the aforesaid directions, W. P. No. 24537 of 1997 stands disposed of in terms of the directions. No costs. ( 9 ) AT the time of hearing, Sri Suresh brought to our notice that as directed by the learned Single Judge, the case of Sri Quadri was considered and he was found fit for appointment as lecturer in Urdu and accordingly, he was appointed by proceedings dated 8-6-1998 and he joined service as lecturer in Urdu on 15-6-1998 and since then he has been serving in the College. ( 10 ) SRI B. Manohar learned senior counsel appearing for the appellant while assailing the correctness of the order of the learned single Judge would contend that the learned single Judge while directing appointment of Sri Quadri as lecturer in Urdu exceeded the well-established parameters of Jurisdiction of the High Court under article 226 of the Constitution. The teamed senior counsel would also contend that no exception can be taken to the order of the Director dated 26-9-1997 impugned in W. P. No. 30790 of 1997 because he has passed the order having regard to the materials placed before him particularly the revised certificate dated 23-9-1996 issued by the Principal, Oxford Cooperative Junior College, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad. The teamed senior counsel would also contend that no exception can be taken to the order of the Director dated 26-9-1997 impugned in W. P. No. 30790 of 1997 because he has passed the order having regard to the materials placed before him particularly the revised certificate dated 23-9-1996 issued by the Principal, Oxford Cooperative Junior College, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad. ( 11 ) THE learned Government Pleader for Higher Education while supporting the stand of the learned Senior Counsel would maintain that the opinion of the learned single Judge that it is not open for the Director to remit the matter for being considered afresh at the hands of the Selection Committee is incorrect and such a power is an essential attribute of the power conferred upon the Director under Rule 7 (3) of the Rules. The learned Government Pleader would also maintain that the question whether the writ appellant has produced else certificate or not is purely a question of fact and such question of fact cannot be resolved only on the basis of affidavits and counter affidavits and therefore the direction issued by the Director to the Selection Committee constituted by the Management of the College to reconsider the case of writ appellant is well justified. ( 12 ) THE learned Standing counsel for the Management of the College would however support the order impugned in the writ appeal. ( 13 ) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties, three questions arise for our consideration and decision; (i) whether the view taken by the learned Judge that the Director has no competence or authority to issue a direction to the Management of the College to reconsider the claim of the writ appellant could be sustained having due regard to the power granted to the Director under Rule 7 (3) of the Rules?; (ii) whether this court in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India could take up investigation of disputed facts and record a finding as to the genuineness or falsity of the certificates produced by the writ appellant? And (iii) whether the findings recorded by the learned Judge which virtually foreclose the whole issue on merit could be sustained? And (iii) whether the findings recorded by the learned Judge which virtually foreclose the whole issue on merit could be sustained? ( 14 ) SUB-RULE (3) of Rule 7 of the Rules reads as follows:3) Competent authority for approval of appointments: The competent authority for approval of appointments of teaching-staff of intermediate education shall be the Board of Intermediate Education and that for other educational institutions stall be the Commissioner of Collegiate Education concerned. The competent authority for approval of appointments of non teaching staff in all the institutions stall be the Director. The educational agency shall get the list of selected candidates approved by the competent authority within one month from the dale of making the appointments, by applying through Form IV. Appointments made as per selection by Service commission, however do not require further approval. ( 15 ) THE second part of Sub-rule (3) of Rule 7 makes it clear that the Aided Educational Institutions cannot make appointment to the post of lecturer without securing prior approval of the competent authority. The language employed in para (2) of Sub-rule (3) of Rule 7 is mandatory in nature. In other words, without prior approval from the competent authority it is totally impermissible for the Aided Educational Institutions to appoint a candidate to the post of lecturer or any other teaching post. If that is so, the power granted on the donee viz. , in the instant case, the Commissioner of the Collegiate Education, should include necessary incidental power, in an appropriate case, to direct the Management of the concerned cottage to reconsider the claims of the applicants for the posts. With utmost respect and after necessary reflection, we are not persuaded to fall in line with the view taken by the learned Judge that under no circumstance the competent statutory authority like the Commissioner can direct the management to reconsider the claim of the applicant for the post of lecturer in exercise of the power conferred upon him under Sub-rule (3) of Rule 7 of the Rules. Such a power, in the context, should be held to be a necessary and incidental power available to the donee of the power. If such a power is denied to the donee of the power, the donee cannot function effectively to regulate the administration of the aided educational institutions. Such a power, in the context, should be held to be a necessary and incidental power available to the donee of the power. If such a power is denied to the donee of the power, the donee cannot function effectively to regulate the administration of the aided educational institutions. Be that as it may, the learned Judge as a matter of fact, has not at all considered the provisions of Sub-rule (3) of Rule 7 of the Rules. ( 16 ) HAVING regard to the facts of this case, there was every justification for the Commissioner to direct the Selection Committee constituted by the Management of the College to reconsider the claim of the writ appellant because as pointed out supra the latest revised certificate issued by the Oxford Cooperative Junior College, Narayanaguda, Hyderabad seems to be in conflict with the certificate issued by the same management on 21-9-1996. Therefore, it becomes necessary for the Selection Committee to consider all these materials and take appropriate decision as to whether the certificates are genuine or concocted. It is quite often said and reiterated by the courts that in exercise of Judicial Review under article 226 of the Constitution, this court cannot take up adjudication of disputed facts particularly where an effective alternative remedy is available to the aggrieved parties before the statutory forums or otherwise. The Director, by the impugned proceeding has not decided the claims of any of the parties finally and he has left it for the Selection Committee constituted by the college to consider and decide the same. The learned single Judge in the order under appeal has recorded the finding that the writ appellant is not at all qualified whereas Sri Quadri is the only candidate qualified and entitled to be considered for the appointment of lecturer. The effect of these two findings would not leave any discretion to the Management to reconsider the claims of the candidates for the post on merits. ( 17 ) IN the result and for the foregoing reasons we allow the writ appeals and set aside the order of the learned single Judge dated 23-3-1998 made in W. P. Nos. 28337 of 1997 and 30790 of 1997. ( 17 ) IN the result and for the foregoing reasons we allow the writ appeals and set aside the order of the learned single Judge dated 23-3-1998 made in W. P. Nos. 28337 of 1997 and 30790 of 1997. We direct the Selection Committee constituted by the Management of the College to consider the claims of the writ appellant as well as Sri Quadri afresh on merits after giving reasonable opportunity to both of them to place material in support of their respective claims and on appreciation of the material already placed by them and send a fresh proposal to the Commissioner Collegiate Education for his approval as required under Sub-rule (3) of Rule 7 of the Rules. We also permit both the writ appellant and Sri Quadri to furnish additional documents or the evidence in support of their cases and if they so desire, they should do so within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. In reconsidering the claims of the writ appellant and Sri Quadri, the Selection Committee is directed not to be influenced by any of the observations or the findings recorded by the learned single Judge in the order under appeal or that of the Director in his impugned proceedings dated 26-9-1997. The Selection Committee constituted by the Management is directed to complete this exercise within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, in the meanwhile, the appointment of Sri Quadri as lecturer in Urdu shall remain unaltered however subject to the approval of the Commissioner under Sub-rule (3) of Rule 7 of the Rules. No costs.