Reservation for the post of Professor cannot be applied taking all the Professors as a cadre and it has to be made subjectwise. There cannot be a reservation for an isolated post. The appropriate authority must follow the roster as published under the Reservation Act and comply with the principles enunciated by the Court.

ORDER

1. These appeals arise ou1 of the judgment of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, wherein the Court has held that there cannot be any reservation in respect of the post of Professor in the university. The aforesaid conclusion is based upon the earlier Division Bench decision of the said Court in a batch of writ petitions which were disposed of by the judgment in Ram Niwas Pandey (Dr.) v. State of u.pl In the aforesaid judgment in paragraph 29, the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court has held that the reservation has to be applied subjectwise and the Professors of the a Departments cannot be clubbed together and treated as one cadre for the purpose of applying reservation. The aforesaid observation has been construed in the impugned judgment to be a total prohibition for applying the reservation policy to the post of Professor. Further, the Court in the impugned judgment is of the conclusion that because of a different selection mechanism for the post of Professor, principle of reservation will have no application.This judgment of the Allahabad High Court in Ram Niwas Pandey (Dr.) v. State of U.P 1 was assailed before this Court. But this Court being of the opinion that no exception can be taken to the judgment, did not entertain the special leave petition. The very advertisement of the University which had been issued in the year 1995 and was the subject-matter of challenge before the Allahabad High Court in the impugned judgment, had also come up for c consideration before this Court in State ofU.P v. Dr. Dina Nath Shukla2• A Bench of two learned Judges of this Court construed the provisions of the Reservation Act and also the provisions of the university statute and came to hold that it would not be permissible to club all posts of Professors together and then apply the principle of reservation. It was felt that if the total posts are advertised without subjectwise specification in every faculty, discipline, speciality or superspeciality, it would be difficult for the candidate to know as to which of the posts would be available either to the general or reserved candidates or whether or not they fulfil or qualify the requirements so as to apply for a particular post and seek selection. Necessarily therefore, the Court approved a part of the earlier judgment of the Allahabad High Court in Ram Niwas Pandey easel even though that judgment had not been cited, by e holding that the reservation has to be applied subjectwise and the Professors of all departments cannot be clubbed together and treated as one cadre. The Court, however, interfered with the conclusion of the Allahabad High Court on the question as to whether there can at all be a reservation on a single post. The Court was of the opinion that if there exists any isolated post, rule of rotation be applied and by application of roster for appointment and for f achieving the said objective the Vice-Chancellor, who is the responsible authority under Section 4 has to enforce the Act, would ensure that single post in each category of Professors, Readers or Lecturers carrying the same scale of pay would be subject to reservation by applying the principle of rotation. This conclusion of the Court in the aforesaid case of Dr. Dina Nath Shukla2 is no longer good law in view of the Constitution Bench judgment of 9 this Court in the case of Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research3 Dr. Dina Nath Shukla2 relied upon the judgment in Madhav case4

2. It has been unequivocally held in the aforesaid Constitution Bench decision that there cannot be any reservation in respect of an isolated post and the judgment of this Court in Union of India v. Madhav4 has been overruled on which judgment the Court had relied upon in the case of Dr. Dina Nath Shukla2

3. Under the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973, Section 2(19) defines the expression "teacher" to mean "a teacher employed by the university for imparting instruction and guiding or conduct