Back
Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : B.S.A.SWAMY
V.Sudheer Reddy - Appellant
Versus
Acharya N.G.Ranga Agricultural University, Hyderabad - Respondent
Decided On : 09-22-99
EDUCATION - AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY - SHORT TERM TRAINING ABROAD - ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA - AGE LIMIT - RELAXATION - SELECTION OF CANDIDATES - CUT-OFF DATE - CHANGE OF CUT-OFF DATE - VALIDITY - LACHES - WRIT PETITION - DISMISSAL.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an associate professor in the Department of Entomology, challenged the proceedings of the respondent University in changing the cut-off date for receipt of applications for short-term training abroad under the Agricultural and Human Resources Development Programme (AHRDP). The petitioner argued that the change in cut-off date violated his right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India and that the University had adopted different procedures for selecting candidates in different academic years, resulting in hostile discrimination against him.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the University had valid and cogent reasons for changing the cut-off date, including the addition of new topics for training, the inclusion of new categories of eligible candidates, and the need for uniformity in the selection process. The court also found that the petitioner was not eligible to apply for the new topics and that he had not demonstrated that the change in cut-off date was made in bad faith or to defeat his claim. The court further held that the petitioner was guilty of laches in filing the writ petition long after the selection process was completed and that he had no legal right to compel the University to send him for training abroad.
Issues: 1. Whether the change in cut-off date for receipt of applications for short-term training abroad violated the petitioner's right to equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether the University adopted different procedures for selecting candidates in different academic years, resulting in hostile discrimination against the petitioner? 3. Whether the writ petition was liable to be dismissed on the ground of laches?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the change in cut-off date was justified by valid and cogent reasons, including the addition of new topics for training, the inclusion of new categories of eligible candidates, and the need for uniformity in the selection process. The court also found that the petitioner was not eligible to apply for the new topics and that he had not demonstrated that the change in cut-off date was made in bad faith or to defeat his claim. 2. The court found that the University had not adopted different procedures for selecting candidates in different academic years and that the petitioner had not been subjected to hostile discrimination. 3. The court held that the petitioner was guilty of laches in filing the writ petition long after the selection process was completed and that he had no legal right to compel the University to send him for training abroad.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed.
( 1 ) THE petitioner an associated professor in the department of Entomology in the respondent University filed this writ petition for issuance of a writ of mandamus to set aside the proceedings of the respondent University in Memo No. 34702/ahrdp/trg. /a2/98, dated 12-7-1999 as it is illegal and arbitrary and consequently direct the respondent University to consider his case for short term training programme abroad in the specialised areas of Biochemical basis of host plant resistance in insects or Biocontrol agents in plant protection under Agricultural and Human Resources Development Programme (for short ahrdp ) for the academic year 1999-2000, duly declaring that lie is within the age limit prescribed for deputation as on 31-1-1999; the last date for receipt of applications from the eligible candidates pursuant to the 1st notification issued by the respondent University in Memo No. 14028/ahrdp/trg. /a2/98, dated 28-12-1998/4-1-1999.
( 2 ) THE respondents University in their counter contended that after issuance of the 1st notification dated 28-12-1998/4-1-1999, calling applications from the eligible candidates for deputation to abroad under the above scheme in the left over 23 topics, the Mid Term Review Team of the World Bank Mission having reviewed the implementation programme increased 28 more topics in three faculties by 31-3-1999. Further, the Board of Management having considered the representation of certain Technical Officers working with Deans, adopted a resolution declaring those officers and Farm Staff of the Colleges also eligible to attend the said programme. In view of these above two developments, the University has taken a decision to issue a fresh notification inviting applications from the eligible candidates for all the fifty topics (23 old + 27 new ). Accordingly, a fresh notification was issued in Memo No. 34702/ AHRDP/abrd TRG/a2/99, dated 30-4-1999 fixing the last for receipt of the applications as 25-5-1999. In the said notification it is also observed that the teachers who have already submitted their applications to the 23 old topics in pursuance to the 1st notification need not apply again for those topics. However, they may apply for the new topics now identified, since the topics and departments are overlapping in the earlier 23 topics and also new 27 topics identified, with a view to provide a chance to the teachers who already applied for the 23 old topics to apply for the new 27 topics and also to enable others who could not apply in pursuance of the earlier notification (1st notification) to avail the opportunity, and the cut-off date was fixed as 25-5-1999. In other words, the case of the respondent University is that to provide opportunity to maximum number of teachers and not to eliminate any one, the cut-off date to consider the eligibility criteria was fixed at 25-5-1999. It is also their case that as per the guidelines concerning deputation under the project, the selection of the candidates for deputation shall be made by a selection committee. As most of the teachers are eligible for deputation both for the old and new topics, to avoid the meeting of the selection committee twice for the same subject and also the hardship that is likely to be caused to the teachers in attending the interview twice and to have uniformity in the process of selection, the University was compelled to fix the cut-off date as 25-5-1999.
( 3 ) NEXTLY, it is contended that the selections were completed in the month of June, 1999 and the Board of Management having approved the list of selected candidates at its meeting held on 15-6-1999, forwarded the same to the Indian Council of Agriculture and Research (ICAR) apart from informing the candidates about their selection. As the writ petition was filed long after the selection process was over i. e. , on 27-7-1999, the writ petition is liable to be dismissed on the ground of latches. Further, as no legal right of the petitioner was infringed
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
