M. A. KHAN, J. ( 1 ) BY way of this petition the petitioner seeks for issuance of a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the opposite parties to hold the Selection Committee and appoint a head of Department of Gastro Enterology ( Surgical) within a stipulated period and in accordance with the provisions of Section 22 (5) of the Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute of Medical sciences Act 1983 ( hereinafter referred to as SGPGIMS Act ). ( 2 ) THE petitioner Prof. Rajan Saxena has filed this writ petition with the allegations that he was appointed as Professor of Gastro enterology (Surgical) by the President of the SGPGIMS on 10. 2. 2000 and yet another candidate Dr. V. K. Kapoor was similarly appointed as Professor in the said Institute. Under Section 22 (5) of the sgpgims Act, Head of the Department has to be appointed and for that purpose a Selection Committee will have to be constituted. It is said that two posts of Professors, Gastro Enterology are of equal grade and rank but inspite of it the Director, SGPGIMS on 11. 2. 2000 issued an office order to the effect that other Professor being the senior Professor shall continue to discharge the duties of Head of department of Gastro Enterology. It has been pleaded that once the petitioner and one another Professor, namely, Dr V. K. Kapoor were selected and appointed as Professors in the same department against the two posts of equal rank and grade, the Director, sgpgims could not hold the intervener i. e. Dr. V. K. Kapoor to be senior to the petitioner and , therefore, aggrieved by the said order, the petitioner has filed a petition under Section 36 of the SGPGIMS act before the Visitor of SGPGIMS, who allowed the petition of the petitioner and directed that the petitioner and Dr. V. K. Kapoor be required to act as Head of the Department for three years on rotational basis as both, the Professors hold equal rank and grade as professor of SGPGIMS. Aggrieved by the above order, Dr. Kapoor then filed a writ petition No. 1169 (SB) of 2001 challenging the visitors order and the same was partly allowed and it was provided that Dr. Aggrieved by the above order, Dr. Kapoor then filed a writ petition No. 1169 (SB) of 2001 challenging the visitors order and the same was partly allowed and it was provided that Dr. V. K. Kapoor shall continue to act as Head of the department Gastro Enterology till regular selection and appointment on the post of Head of Department is made in accordance with the provisions of Sub Section (5) of Section 22 of the sgpgims Act. The appointment of Dr. V. K. Kapoor as Head of the department is totally transitory and temporary and the Director has not cared to appoint Head of the Department by following the provisions of Section 22 (5) of the Act. The petitioner made several representations but all in vain; hence the petition. ( 3 ) A joint counter-affidavit for and on behalf of opposite parties no. 1 and 2, has been filed in which it has been pleaded that no post of Head of Department has ever been sanctioned or created in any of the department of the Institute since the inception of the sgpgims in the year 1986. Since need was felt to have an administrative figurehead in each department to function as Head of Department, as a practice the senior most teacher in every department has been designated as the Head of Department. It has further been pleaded that from the very inception the SGPGIMS has been attempting to model itself on the pattern of All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as AIIMS)and since the AIIMS, New Delhi also senior most teacher of each department has been working as Head of Department, the sgpgims is also following the said practice. The petitioner and Dr. V. K. Kapoor are both Professors in the department of Gastro enterology (Surgical) and Dr. V. K. Kapoor is the senior most professor and thus he was designated as Head of Department. The order passed by the Visitor of SGPGIMS was quashed by the this court and it was directed that Dr. V. K. Kapoor shall continue to discharge the functions of the Head of Department till regular selection and appointment on the post of Head of Department is made as per the provisions of Section 22 (5) of the SGPGIMS Act, 1983. V. K. Kapoor shall continue to discharge the functions of the Head of Department till regular selection and appointment on the post of Head of Department is made as per the provisions of Section 22 (5) of the SGPGIMS Act, 1983. Section 18 of the SGPGIMS Act, 1983 provides for constitution of the Governing Body, which is the highest body and the said body is responsible for the general superintendence direction and control of the affairs of the Institute. The judgment dated 18. 3. 2002 passed in Writ Petition No. 1169 (S/b) of 2001 was placed in the meeting of the general body. No rule or regulation has been framed for laying down the criteria for selection as Head of Department in the sgpgims and in absence of any rule or regulation the selection committee could not be constituted and it does not appear to be plausible as there is no criteria or yardstick on the basis of which the said committee can make any recommendation for selection of Head of the Department. It has further been pleaded that neither the zone of eligibility has been laid down nor has any prescription been provided anywhere as to whether the Head of Department would be selected by the selection committee on the basis of the seniority or merit or merit cum seniority. It has also not been prescribed as to whether only professors of the Department can be considered for head of Department or whether any other teacher would also be considered. It is also not specified as to whether a complete outsider, who is not even a teacher in the Institute can be considered for Head of the Department. Accordingly, in the Governing Body meeting held on 26. 11. 2002, it was resolved that some guidelines for appointment of Head of Department would have to be made. In this connection, legal advice of Law Department of the State of U. P. was sought and it was directed that till further orders the status-quo should be maintained. On 16. 6. 2002 the Director, SGPGIMS appointed a committee for preparing guidelines for appointment of head of Departments. The said committee recommended that senior most Professor and if there is no Professor in a department then the senior most faculty Member not below the rank of Associate professor be appointed as Head of Department. On 16. 6. 2002 the Director, SGPGIMS appointed a committee for preparing guidelines for appointment of head of Departments. The said committee recommended that senior most Professor and if there is no Professor in a department then the senior most faculty Member not below the rank of Associate professor be appointed as Head of Department. It was further recommended that if the senior most person withdraws or an associate Professor is not available, then the governing body would designate a suitable faculty member for appointment as Head of department. The recommendation was sent to U. P. Government to approve the aforesaid recommendations and if necessary amendments in the Act may also be made. However, but no result and, therefore, the pattern of AIIMS, New Delhi in the said matters is being adopted. ( 4 ) WE have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and have gone through the record. ( 5 ) IT is not disputed that SGPGIMS Act, 1983 provides for appointment of Head of Department. Section 22 (5) of the Act lays down as follows: 22 (5 ). The Selection Committee for the appointment of a Professor of Head of Department of the Institute shall consist of:"a) The Director; b) The Director of Medical Education, Uttar pradesh; c) Three experts to be nominated by the Visitor; d) Such other persons as may be prescribed. Provided that in the case of the appointment of a professor, the Head of Department concerned shall also be a member of the Selection Committee. " ( 6 ) THE above provision clearly shows that there would be a selection Committee for appointment of a Professor of Head of department and in case of selection of Head of department there would be a committee consisting of Director of the SGPGIMS, the director of Medical Education, Uttar Pradesh, three experts to be nominated by the Visitor and such other persons as may be prescribed. Thus it goes without saying that there would be a Head of Department in all the Departments of the Institute. How that head of Departments shall be selected is also clearly provided in section 22 (5) of the Act. The Director, SGPGIMS by now has been adopting a practice that a senior most Professor in a particular department shall be the Head of Department. It is said that it is on the pattern of AIIMS, New Delhi. How that head of Departments shall be selected is also clearly provided in section 22 (5) of the Act. The Director, SGPGIMS by now has been adopting a practice that a senior most Professor in a particular department shall be the Head of Department. It is said that it is on the pattern of AIIMS, New Delhi. What are the rules and regulations of the AIIMS, New Delhi are not clear and have not been brought before this Court, but once the provisions of Section 22 (5) of the Act clearly provides for selection of Head of Department, it is mandatory on the Director to follow the same procedure while making such appointments. The Apex Court time and again deprecated the stop gap or adhoc appointment. We are also of the considered opinion that practice of such temporary or adhoc arrangement shall not continue for an indefinite period and best efforts should be made by the authorities concerned to make permanent arrangement at the earliest. A permanent arrangement has to be made and there cannot be a headless body. If any department is there, some Head of Department shall also be there. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the SGPGIMS that relevant rules, regulations have not been framed as yet and till rules and regulations are framed, amended and carried out, a stopgap arrangement has been made to continue the appointment of senior most Professor as Head of Department. From the record it is also clear that the State of U. P. in this regard is also lethargic and not clear as the Chief Secretary also is one of the member in the governing body of the SGPGIMS. ( 7 ) THE judgment in the earlier writ petition clearly lays down that a Selection Committee for selection of Head of Department in accordance with provisions of Section 22 (5) of the Act will have to be constituted. No compliance of that order has been made. Some recommendations were made by the Governing Body of the sgpgims and those recommendations have also neither been rejected nor approved by the Government of U. P. Thus, the attitude of the State of U. P. in this regard is not clear. In fact no clear policy has been adopted for appointment of Head of Department of various departments of SGPGIMS. In fact no clear policy has been adopted for appointment of Head of Department of various departments of SGPGIMS. The prayer of the petitioner is clear and simple that some Head of Department should be there. The petitioner may be one of the candidates for appointment as such. ( 8 ) SECTION 22 (5) of the SGPGIMS Act clearly and unambiguously provides two things; firstly that there would be a Head of department in every department and secondly, that the Head of department shall be selected by the Selection Committee which shall be constituted by the Director of the SGPGIMS. It is really unfortunate that the Director has failed to discharge his duties and did not like to follow the provisions of Section 22 (5) of the SGPGIMS act despite the directions given by the High Court in earlier writ petition and instead liked to choose the easy course of having a stop gap arrangement by making the senior most Professor as Head of department, most probably on a pattern of AIIMS, New Delhi. Once there is a clear cut provision of Section 22 (5) of the SGPGIMS Act, there was no justification with the Director to act derogatory to the provision of Section 22 (5) of the SGPGIMS Act. He has to appoint a head of Department in every department of the Institute and for that purpose he has to constitute a Selection Committee ,if there was some difficulty in getting the things done property, he should have framed rules, regulations or has suggested some amendment in the act. Though in the wake of the clear cut provision of Section 22 (5) of the SGPGIMS Act there is hardly any requirement of any rule, regulation or amendment in the Act. Accordingly, it is incumbent upon the Director to constitute a Selection Committee as required by Section 22 (5) of the SGPGIMS Act. There is nothing on record to show that the Director ever sincerely tried to constitute a Selection committee as required under Section 22 (5) of the SGPGIMS Act and instead he got himself indulged in getting the rules or regulations framed or getting the relevant Act amended. Even if that was to be done, it could have very well been done without any delay when the Chief Secretary is one of the members of the Governing Body of institute. Even if that was to be done, it could have very well been done without any delay when the Chief Secretary is one of the members of the Governing Body of institute. Anyhow there was no justification with the Director to continue with the stopgap arrangement for a long period and permitting the senior most Professors as Head of Department with the stop gap arrangement for a long period, which was not permissible in the wake of clear cut provision of Section 22 (5) of the sgpgims Act. ( 9 ) ACCORDINGLY, the writ petition is allowed and the Director, sgpgims, is directed to constitute a Selection Committee and appoint Head of Department of Gastro Enterology (Surgical) within a period of three months from today and steps shall also be taken by the Director, SGPGIMS, Lucknow for constitution of a Selection committee in respect of appointments of Head of Departments of all the departments in the SGPGIMS in accordance with Section 22 (5) of the SGPGIMS Act. ( 10 ) IT is further clarified that the Selection Committee so constituted shall determine the modalities, criterion and mode of selection of the Head of the Department and it would also be open to the Selection Committee to see as to whether any insider or outsider can be selected and as to whether the criteria for such selection shall be seniority cum-merit or merit-cum-seniority. .