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

2024 Supreme(AP) 182

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
G.Ramakrishna Prasad, J.
P Ravi Kumar - Appellant
Versus
Venkateswara Veterinary University - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 28669 of 2023
Decided On : 22-01-2024

Advocates appeared:
Kavitha Gottipati, Advocate, Kotha Rama Mohan Rao, Advocate, Venkateswara Veterinary, Advocate

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the appointment of a Professor as Associate Dean is a 'tenure post' for a period of two years, not a promotional post. The decision of the university to permanently disqualify the petitioner without providing an opportunity to explain and without conducting an inquiry was in violation of principles of Natural Justice.

Headnote:

Natural Justice - Appointment Disqualification - Guidelines - [APPOINTMENT DISQUALIFICATION] - [N/A] - [Guideline No.7, Andhra Pradesh State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1996] - The court considered the appointment of a Professor as Associate Dean and determined it to be a 'tenure post' for a period of two years, not a promotional post. The court found that the decision of the Respondent University to permanently disqualify the petitioner from holding the post of Associate Dean without providing an opportunity to explain and without conducting an inquiry was in violation of principles of Natural Justice. The court set aside the decision and directed the University to consider the validity of the reasons stated by the petitioner in accordance with the law and principles of Natural Justice. The court also held that the petitioner is entitled to be appointed as Associate Dean or a similar post in the future in any of the constituent colleges under the Respondent University.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, a Professor at a veterinary college, was appointed as Associate Dean but declined the position due to his wife's ill-health. The university cancelled his appointment and later permanently disqualified him from holding the post without providing an opportunity to explain or conducting an inquiry. The petitioner challenged the decision after several years.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the appointment of a Professor as Associate Dean is a 'tenure post' for a period of two years, not a promotional post. The decision of the university to permanently disqualify the petitioner without following principles of Natural Justice was held to be invalid. The court set aside the decision and directed the university to consider the validity of the reasons stated by the petitioner in accordance with the law and principles of Natural Justice. The court also held that the petitioner is entitled to be appointed as Associate Dean or a similar post in the future in any of the constituent colleges under the Respondent University.

Issues: The issues before the court included whether the appointment of a Professor as Associate Dean is a promotional post or a tenure post, the validity of Guideline No.7, and whether the decision of the university was in violation of principles of Natural Justice.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the appointment of a Professor as Associate Dean is a 'tenure post' for a period of two years, not a promotional post. The decision of the university to permanently disqualify the petitioner without providing an opportunity to explain and without conducting an inquiry was in violation of principles of Natural Justice. The court set aside the decision and directed the university to consider the validity of the reasons stated by the petitioner in accordance with the law and principles of Natural Justice. The court also held that the petitioner is entitled to be appointed as Associate Dean or a similar post in the future in any of the constituent colleges under the Respondent University.

Final Decision: The court partly allowed the writ petition, set aside the decision of the university to permanently disqualify the petitioner from holding the post of Associate Dean, and directed the university to consider the validity of the reasons stated by the petitioner in accordance with the law and principles of Natural Justice. The court also held that the petitioner is entitled to be appointed as Associate Dean or a similar post in the future in any of the constituent colleges under the Respondent University.

JUDGMENT

G.RAMAKRISHNA PRASAD, J. - Heard Smt. Kavitha Gottipati, Learned Counsel for the Writ Petitioner and Sri Kotha Rama Mohan Rao, Learned Standing Counsel for Sri Venkateswara Veterinary University.

2. The prayer sought in the present Writ Petition is as under:

"It is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction more particularly one in the nature of a writ of mandamus declaring the Memo No.11576/Ser. I/2008 dtd. 9/12/2019 of the 1st respondent wherein informed the petitioner that he will not be considered in future for the post of Associate Dean in any constituent Colleges of the University and appointing the 4th respondent as Associate Dean of NTR College of Veterinary Science, Gannavaram ignoring the case of petitioner though he is senior than the 4th respondent in the cadre of Professor vide Proc. No.350054/Ser.I/2021 dated 30-10- 2023 of the 1st Respondent as arbitrary, illegal, unconstitutional, violative of amended Rule 28 of AP Subordinate Service Rules, 1996 issued vide GOMs.No.92 (GAD) dtd. 28/8/2023 apart from being violative of law declared by this Honble Court in MVRLS Ravikanth vs State of Andhra Pradesh ((2017) 06 AP CK 0001) G.Boyanna Vs. Registrar (Admn.) High Court of AP and Anr.{2009(2) ALD 402 (DB)} and The District Educational Officer, Kurnool and Ors vs. Shahnaz Begum (WP No. 26654 of 2005) and consequently set aside the same by directing the Respondents to consider the case of petitioner for promotion/appointment to the post of Associate Dean in NTR College of Veterinary Science, Gannavaram or in any other constituent colleges in the existing or in future vacancy as per his Seniority and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case."

FACTS IN BRIEF:

3. Petitioner herein is a Professor working in NTR College of Veterinary Science, Gannavaram, Krishna District, one of the constituent colleges of the Respondent No.1 University. Respondent No.1 University, by Proceedings bearing Proc.No.3839/Ser.I/2013, dtd. 25/2/2013 (Ex.P.2), has issued guidelines with approval of the Board of Management for appointment of Associate Deans of Colleges under Respondent No.1 University. Guideline No.6 would stipulate that a faculty member denying the assignment twice when offered, shall not be considered subsequently for a similar post or any other higher administrative responsibility. Subsequently, vide Proceedings bearing Proc.No.3839/Services.I/2012, dtd. 21/9/2017, the Guideline No.7 has been incorporated, which reads as under:

Existing guideline Revised guideline

7. Appointment of Associate Dean will be made by the Vice-Chancellor based on the recommendations of the Faculty Deans Committee When such appointed Professor declines to accept the offer without any valid and genuine reasons, he/she shall not be considered subsequently for similar post in same or other constituent college. Consequently, in such situation, the other Professors in the panel recommended by Faculty Deans Committee will be considered and so on and appointed by Vice-Chancellor based on seniority and suitability.

4. The Guideline No.6 in the Proceeding bearing Proc.No.3839/Ser.I/2013, dtd. 25/2/2013 has been deleted in the new Proceedings dtd. 21/9/2017.

5. The Writ Petitioner was appointed as Associate Dean, College of Veterinary Science, Proddatur, for a period of two years with effect from the date of assumption of charge vide Proceeding bearing Proc.No.11576/Ser.I/2008, dtd. 10/9/2018 (Ex.P.3). Within five days from the issuance of these Proceedings, the Writ Petitioner herein has submitted a Representation to the Registrar of Respondent No.1 University on 15/9/2018 (Ex.P.4) to the effect that he will not be able to assume charge as Associate Dean in view of the ill-health of his wife which includes diagnosis of thyroid carcinoma and associated treatment. The said Representation dtd. 15/9/2018 is extracted as under:

"I submit that I have bee

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