Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
S. Saghir Ahmad and D.P. Wadhwa, JJ.
Yogendra Singh Rawat - Appellants
Versus
Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University - Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 365-370 of 1994
Decided On : 05-02-1997
U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 - Section 31 - University Grants Commission - Appointment of teacher of the University - Sub-section (6) of Section 13 of the Universities Act provides that where any matter is of urgent nature requiring immediate action and the same cannot be immediately dealt with by any officer or authority or any other body of the University empowered by or under the Universities Act then to deal with that situation the Vice-Chancellor may take action as he may deem fit. He shall thereafter forthwith report the action taken by him to the Chancellor and also to the officer, authority or other body who or which in the ordinary course would have dealt with the matter. Under Sub-section (8) of Section 13 where exercise of power by the Vice-Chancellor under sub-section (6) involved the appointment of an officer or a teacher of the University, such appointment shall terminate on the appointment being made in the prescribed manner or on the expiration of a period of six months from the date of the order of the Vice-Chancellor, whichever is earlier. That would mean that the appointment of a lecturer made by the Vice-Chancellor could not last for more than six months. Section 31 of the Universities Act provides for the appointment of teachers of the University. Sub-section (1) thereof provides that the teachers of the University shall be appointed by the Executive Council on the recommendations of a Selection Committee in the manner laid down in that Section – Held, It will also be seen that before March 1989 for appointment as a lecturer, it was necessary that a person should possess a Doctorate degree in the subject and consistently have good academic record. However, before this date if no candidate having Doctorate degree was available but the Selection Committee was of the opinion that the research and thesis work published by a candidate was of a very high standard it may relax any such requirement of possessing a Doctorate degree. After May 25, 1989 entire statute 11.01 was substituted and now a candidate must possess good academic record that is he should have obtained either 55 per cent marks in Bachelor Degree Examination, and Second Class in Intermediate Examination or 50 per cent marks in each of the two examinations separately subject of course to his possessing consistently good academic record. Apart from possessing good academic record under sub-section (6) it is necessary for a candidate to have passed the qualifying comprehensive test conducted by the University Grants Commission. But then he is exempted from that test if he had already been awarded Ph.D. and M.Phil. degree or who would be awarded M.Phil. degree upto December 1990 or Ph.D. degree upto December 1992 - In University of Delhi v. Raj Singh & Others, 1994 Supp.(3) SCC 516 : 1995(1) SCT 1, the question before this Court was if the University Grants Commission (Qualifications Required of a Person to be Appointed to the Teaching Staff of a University and Institutions affiliated to it) Regulations, 1991 were valid and mandatory and if so was the Delhi University obliged under law to comply therewith. This Court gave the answer in affirmative. It referred to Entries 63 and 66 of List I in the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution of India and to the provisions of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956 vis-a-vis Delhi University Act, 1922. The University Grants Commission Act was enacted under the provisions of Entry 66 of List I of the Seventh Schedule. It entitled Parliament to legislate in respect of "coordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education or research and scientific and technical institutions." This Court observed that entry 66 of List I gave power to the Union to see that the required standard of higher education in the country was maintained. It was the exclusive responsibility of the Central Government to coordinate and determine the standards of higher education - Appeal dismissed
JUDGMENT :
D.P. Wadhwa, J.
1. Special leave granted.
2. The appellants filed writ petitions in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad praying that they be granted substantive appointments as lecturers in the Hemwati Nandan Bahuguna Garhwal University (for short 'the University') in terms of the Uttar Pradesh State Universities (Second Amendment) Ordinance (No. 44 of 1991) which was later passed as Act No. 1 of 1992 by the U.P. Legislature called the U.P. State Universities (Amendment) Act, 1992 (for short, the 'Amending Act'). The Amending Act amended the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 (for short, the 'Principal Act'). A Division Bench of the High Court, however, did not find any merit in the writ petitions and dismissed the same by judgment dated August 20, 1993. Aggrieved, the appellants have come to this Court.
3. Originally there were eight appellants. Appellants Y.S. Rawat, G.P. Sharma and J.P. Madhwal are stated to be no longer interested in pursuing their appeals. The appellants before us are now Dr. L.P. Lakhera, Shri R.S. Negi, Dr. M.S. Sati, Shri Ajay Pal Singh and Dr. Surendra Joshi.
4. Sub-section (6) of Section 13 of the Universities Act provides that where any matter is of urgent nature requiring immediate action and the same cannot be immediately dealt with by any officer or authority or any other body of the University empowered by or under the Universities Act then to deal with that situation the Vice-Chancellor may take action as he may deem fit. He shall thereafter forthwith report the action taken by him to the Chancellor and also to the officer, authority or other body who or which in the ordinary course would have dealt with the matter. Under Sub-section (8) of Section 13 where exercise of power by the Vice-Chancellor under sub-section (6) involved the appointment of an officer or a teacher of the University, such appointment shall terminate on the appointment being made in the prescribed manner or on the expiration of a period of six months from the date of the order of the Vice-Chancellor, whichever is earlier. That would mean that the appointment of a lecturer made by the Vice-Chancellor could not last for more than six months. Section 31 of the Universities Act provides for the appointment of teachers of the University. Sub-section (1) thereof provides that the teachers of the University shall be appointed by the Executive Council on the recommendations of a Selection Committee in the manner laid down in that Section. Sub-section (10) of Section 31 provides that no selection for any appointment shall be made except after advertisement of the vacancy in at least three issues of two newspapers having adequate circulation in the State of Uttar Pradesh. Section 49 deals with Statutes and clause (d) lays down that the Statutes may provide for the classification and recruitment (including minimum qualifications and experience) of the teachers of the University. As to what are the qualifications prescribed for a lecturer by relevant Statutes of the University, it will be appropriate to refer to the Ordinance which was subsequently replaced by Act No. 1 of 1992. Sub-section (2) of Section 1 of this Amending Act provided that this Act shall be deemed to have come into force on November 22, 1991. Sections 2 and 3 of this Act amending the Principal Act, that is the Universities Act, are as follows:
(a) in sub-section (6), after the words "where any matter" in words "other than the appointment of teacher of the University" shall be inserted.
(b) in sub-section, the words "or a teacher of the University" shall be omitted.
3. In Section 31 of the Principal Act :-
(a) in sub-section (1) words "The selection committee shall meet as often as necessary" shall be inserted at the end:-
(b) in sub-section (3) after
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
