IMPORTANT POINT
The impugned order passed by P & H High Court allowing respondent No.1 to be considered for post of Sociology is not sustainable in law as he does not possess qualification of NET prescribed by UGC Rules.

JUDGMENT

Shah, J.-Leave granted.

2. In these appeals the appellant has challenged the order dated 5.12.2000 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in C.W.P. No. 5428 of 2000 and order dated 22nd December, 2000 passed in Review Application C.M. No. 31005 of 2000 in C.W.P. No. 5428 of 2000. By the impugned order, the High Court allowed the petition filed by Respondent No.1 Gurmeet Singh Sidhu and held that he was eligible for consideration for the post of Lecturer in Sociology and as he was not interviewed, directions were issued to hold his interview for the said post. It was also further held that if respondent No. 1 was found to be better on merit than the selected candidate, the appointing authority will take necessary steps in that behalf.

3. At the time of hearing, learned counsel for the appellant, who was selected and appointed to the post of lecturer and whose selection is set aside in pursuance of the aforesaid directions, submitted that respondent was not selected as he was not having qualifications prescribed by the UGC for the said post.

4. As against this, learned counsel for respondent No.1 submitted that respondent was duly qualified and the direction issued by the High Court is on the basis of qualifications prescribed by the Punjabi University. At the time of hearing of this matter, none appeared for the Punjabi University and the learned counsel who has filed his appearance for the State of Punjab submitted that he was not having any instructions.

5. For appreciating the issue involved, we would refer to the advertisement (Annexure P3) dated 22nd October, 1999 which provides for qualifications for the post in question. The relevant part is as under:

"7. Lecturer in Sociology. One on regular basis

8 to 19 xx xx xx xx xx

Qualification and Grade as per UGC/Punjabi University rules. Enclose Bank Draft of Rs. 100/- for the post of Lecturer and Rs. 50/- for the other posts in favour of Principal Khalasa College, Patiala alongwith attested copies within 15 days from the date of the publication. For the post of Lecturer application may only be sent to Dean College Development Council, Punjabi University, Patiala. Applications be addressed in the name of Principal, Khalasa College, Patiala. The candidates who have already sent applications in response to advertisement published in English and Punjabi Tribune dated 3.6.99 need not send application again. Their earlier application will be considered."

6. As per the said advertisement, required qualification is as prescribed by the UGC rules and the Punjabi University rules.

7. In the written statement filed on behalf of respondent-University before the High Court, it has been specifically stated that respondent No.1 has suppressed from the High Court the fact that qualifications for appointment to the post of lecturer were amended and an amendment was circulated to all colleges vide Circular dated 18th May, 1999. As per the said Circular, a candidate was eligible to be appointed as a lecturer in Sociology if he had cleared the eligibility test, namely, NET for lecturers conducted by UGC, CSIR or similar test accredited by the University. It was also pointed out that Punjabi University, Patiala had received a letter dated 21st September, 1999 signed by the UGC to the effect that NET examination was compulsory for a person to be appointed as a lecturer and only the candidates who had completed their M.Phil or submitted their Ph.D thesis up to December 31, 1993 were exempted from passing the NET examinations. The University further submitted that as per the advertisement appointment was to be made on the basis of the qualifications prescribed by the Punjabi University/UGC. The respondent No. 1 was not fulfilling the above qualifications, therefore, he was rightly not appointed.

8. Further the appellant has produced a letter (Annexure P1) dated 18th May, 1999 circulated by the University which, inter alia, provides that "besid