Judgment

MITTER, J.: In this appeal by special leave the appellant challenges the decision of the Mysore High Court quashing his appointment as a University Grants professor in Sanskrit by the Board of Appointments on the sole ground of non-compliance with Rule 5 of the Supplementary Rules promulgated under the Mysore University Act, 1956. That rule provides:

"The Board of Appointments shall give in writing the reasons for the selection of any candidate and also the basis on which the selection has been made and always give in writing the reasons for overlooking the claims of those who are seniors (i. e. total service as teacher) and/or have higher qualifications."

2. The facts are as follows: The appellant and the main contesting respondent have the same academic qualifications. The appellant joined the university as a lecturer in 1945 and he was appointed a temporary Reader in Sanskrit under the University Grants Commission Scheme which was distinct from other University appointments. He was appointed a permanent Reader in the University under the said Scheme in April 1960. The first respondent had joined the University as a lecturer in 1938 i. e. seven years before the appellant. H