SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2010 Supreme(SC) 647

2010 (6) Supreme 18
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Dalveer Bhandari and T.S. Thakur, JJ.
Dr. Basavaiah — Appellant
versus
Dr. H.L. Ramesh & Ors. — Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 6057 of 2010
(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 9473/2006)
with
Dr. Manjunath — Appellant
versus
Dr. H.L. Ramesh & Ors. — Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 6058 of 2010
(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 9474/2006)
Decided on : 29-7-2010

IMPORTANT POINT
Opinion/decision of expert bodies should not normally be interfered with.

Headnote:Service Law – University – Appointment – Courts should be slow to interfere with the opinions expressed by the experts particularly in a case when there is no allegation of mala fides against the experts who had constituted the Selection Board. (Para 28)

       AIR 1965 SC 491; (1979) 2 SCC 339; (1980) 3 SCC 418; (1984) 4 SCC 27; (1990) 2 SCC 746; (1992) 2 SCC 220; (1990) 1 SCC 305; (1994) 1 SCC 169; (2000) 3 SCC 59; (2001) 5 SCC 486 ; (2001) 8 SCC 427; (2008) 14 SCC 306; (2008) 9 SCC 284; (2009) 11 SCC 726 – Relied upon

       Facts of the case:

       Eligibility for appointment as Readers in Sericulture is in question in these appeals.

       Finding of the Court:

       The impugned judgment cannot be sustained.

       Result : Appeal allowed.

       

JUDGMENT

Dalveer Bhandari, J. —

1.Leave granted.

2.These appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 2.8.2005 passed in Writ Appeal No. 5014 of 2004 and dated 22.3.2006 passed in Review Petition Nos. 593, 594 and 632 of 2005 in Writ Appeal No. 5014 of 2004 by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore

3.By this judgment, we propose to decide the cases of both the appellants Dr. Basavaiah and Dr. D. Manjunath, because exactly similar issues have been raised in both the appeals. But, for the sake of convenience, the facts of Civil Appeal No. 6057 of 2010 arising out of SLP (C) No. 9473 of 2006 are recapitulated.

4.The short controversy which needs to be adjudicated in these cases is whether the appellants Dr. Basavaiah and Dr. D. Manjunath were qualified to be appointed as Readers in Sericulture?

5.Brief facts which are necessary to dispose of the appeals are recapitulated as under:

6.The appellants in both the appeals were appointed as Readers in Sericulture in the year 1999 on the basis of the qualifications possessed by them in accordance with the vacancy Notification No. ET.8/335/98-99 dated 12.11.1998.

As per the notification, the qualifications necessary for appointment as Readers as per the said notification are set out as under:

“READER: Prospective candidates shall have consistently good academic record with a Doctorate Degree or equivalent published work. Candidates from outside the university system, in addition, shall also possess at least 55% marks or an equivalent grade at Master’s degree level.

Applicants shall possess eight years experience of teaching and/or research including 3 years for a Ph.D. Degree, and shall have made some mark in the areas of scholarship as evidenced by quality of publications, contribution to educational innovation, design of new courses, curricula, etc.” (emphasis supplied)

7.Dr. Basavaiah obtained M.Sc. and Ph.D. degrees in Botany. Thereafter, he served as Senior Research Assistant in the Central Sericultural Research and Training Institute (for short CSRTI), Mysore from the years 1986 to 1992. Dr. Basavaiah, the appellant herein while working as Senior Research Assistant, joined the Karnataka State Sericulture Research and Development Institute (for short, KSSRDI) at Bangalore as Scientific Officer-II and continued to work there till 31.1.1994. In addition to the research work he had taught many training courses and also worked as the examiner of M.Sc. Sericulture.

8.The appellant was selected to the higher post of Scientific Officer-I (Scientist-D). The appellant had also undergone Overseas Training in Sericulture for two months in the Department of Sericulture at Zhejiang Agricultural University, Hangzhou, China and had also passed certificate course in Genetic Engineering from the Indian Institute of Science, Bangalore.

9.The appellant had 18 years of research experience and out of that, 13 years was directly in the field of Sericulture. He also worked for six years at CSRTI, Mysore, which is an internationally renowned Sericulture Research and Training Institute and seven years at KSSRDI, Bangalore.

10.The appellant had more than five years of teaching experience. The appellant’s twenty Research Papers were published on Sericulture in Journals of national and international repute. The appellant was the first author in twelve Research Papers and in other eight Research Papers he was the second author. The appellant possessed the equivalent qualification prescribed in the said vacancy notification dated 12.11.1998.

11.The appellant, Dr. Basavaiah was M.Sc. and Ph.D. in Botany. He had also got sixteen years of Research experience. He also possessed postgraduate diploma in Sericulture and worked as Sericulture inspector in the State Government and also worked as Senior Research Assistant at the CSRTI, Mysore. He worked as the Scientific Officer II with effect from 29.5.1992 to 31.1.1994 and he worked as the Scientific Officer-I with effect from 1.2.1994 till his appointment as the Read






















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top