Andhra Pradesh High Court
Judges : K.M.AGARWAL, S.PARVATHA RAO
N.Chandrayudu - Appellant
Versus
Venkateswara University, Tirupati - Respondent
Decided On : 12-23-94
UNIVERSITY ADVERTISEMENT - GROUPWISE RESERVATION - VALIDITY - ADVERTISEMENT NOT SPECIFYING RESERVATIONS OF VARIOUS POSTS - HELD, ADVERTISEMENT IS ILLEGAL, ARBITRARY AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, belonging to a Backward class in 'b' category, applied for the post of Lecturer in Geography in response to Advertisement No. E-11 (2)/1993/advt/93 (1) dated 17-12-1993 calling for applications for several posts of professors, Readers and Lecturers in the various faculties of the respondent-university and its constituent colleges. The advertisement showed that all the posts in Group II (Sciences) for which applications were called for are reserved but it did not indicate any reservations faculty-wise. The petitioner questioned this type of reservation made without indicating the category for which the post in a particular faculty has been reserved.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the advertisement issued by the respondent-university was illegal, arbitrary, and unconstitutional as it failed to notify the reservations of the posts subject-wise. The court held that the candidates belonging to the reserved categories would not know for which of the posts they could apply, the selection committee would not know whether they were interviewing the candidates for reserved posts or not, and it would give scope to the Executive Council to eliminate unwanted selected candidates after the lists of the selected candidates were received from the selection committees which would lead to arbitrariness and invidious discrimination.
Issues: 1. Whether the advertisement issued by the respondent-university specifying groupwise reservations without indicating the category for which the post in a particular faculty has been reserved is valid? 2. Whether such advertisement violates the principles of equality and non-discrimination enshrined in the Constitution?
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Suresh Chandra Verma v. Chancellor, Nagpur University (AIR 1990 SC 2023) to hold that the advertisement issued by the respondent-university was bad in law since it had failed to notify the reservations of the posts subject-wise and had mentioned only the total number of reserved posts without indicating the particular posts so reserved subject-wise. The court held that such an advertisement defeats the purpose for which the applications are invited from the reserved category candidates and consequently negates the object of the reservation policy.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition and directed the respondent-university to notify the vacancies specifying the reservations, subject-wise instead of group-wise.
( 1 ) THE petitioner seeks a Writ in the nature of Mandamus, declaring the action of the respondent i. e. , Sn venkateswara University, in not specifying the reservations of the various posts advertised in Advertisement No. E-11 (2)/ 1993/advt/93 (l) dated 17-12-1993 as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional, and setting aside the same and consequently directing the respondent to notify the vacancies specifying the reservations, subject-wise instead of groupwise etc
( 2 ) THE petitioner states that he belongs to a Backward class in b category. He states that he took his M. Sc. degree in Geography from Sri Krishnadevaraya University in first class in 1990 and that he got his Ph. D. degree in the same subject in March, 1994. He applied for the post of Lecturer in Geography in response to Advertisement No. E. 1 1 (2)/ adverlisement/93 (1) dated 17-12-1993 calling for applications for several posts of professors, Readers and Lecturers in the various faculties of the colleges of the respondent- university and its constituent colleges. As per the said advertisement, the various faculties in the University were divided into three groups - Group I (Arts): Group II (Sciences) and Group III (Engineering and technology ). Group II comprises of II faculties brought under the heading sciences , namely, Botany, Chemistry, geography, Geology, Home Science, mathematics, Psychology, Virology, Zoology and Anthropology. It is has to be pointed out that though serial Nos. are given from 21 to 31 for the faculties in this group, serial No. 29 is missing. Applications for 10 posts of Lecturers falling in this group were invited of under the said advertisement dated 17-12-1993, 3 of which are temporary posts, the remaining 7 being regular. The regular posts advertised are one each in Botany, Geography and Virology, and 2 each in Geology and Home Science; the temporary posts advertised are one in Home science and 2 in Zoology. The number of posts of Lecturers reserved for Scheduled castes, Scheduled Tribes and Backward classes including carry forward vacancies of scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes "as per the rule of reservation prescribed by the state Governmnent", have been shown as 3,5 and 2 respectively; also one temporary post for scheduled Castes, and one temporary post for scheduled Tribes. Thus the advertisement shows that all the posts in Group 11 for which applications were called for arc reserved But it docs not indicate any reservations faculty- wise The petitioner questions this type of reservation made without indicating the category for which the post in a particular faculty has been reserved. In the present case, as already stated above, the petitioner belongs to Backward class b" category and he applied for the post of Lecturer in the geography faculty. His complaint is that the advertisement docs not show whether the said post is reserved for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled tribes or Backward Classes though it is state that two posts of Lecturers in Group II are reserved for Backward Class. The same is the position in respect of the other posts of lecturers for which applications are invited by the said advertisement. The petitioner questions this method of groupwise reservation. He states dial the University seeks tojustify tliis method ofgroupwisc reservation on the ground that it is doing it as per Government orders He submits that group-wise method of reservation is leading to large scale irregularities and abuse of power leading to failure in the implementation of the reservation policy. He submits that this groupwise method of reservation enables the University authorities to accept the applications of candidates belonging to all categories including other castes category. This is leading to candidates belonging to all categories being interviewed simultaneously by the Selection Committee for every vacant post in the group for which applications have been invited because the Selection Committee itself wi
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.