1. Petitiones are practicing advocates of Patna High Court and different civil courts. They are aggrieved on account of requisite qualifications mentioned in the notice published by Patna University for appointment of part time lecturer in Patna Law College on 14 sanctioned posts. Patna University has published notice dated 6.1.2009 in daily newspapers vide Advertisement No.G/Admn/ 011/09 (Part-time lecturer Patna Law College), inviting applications from eligible candidates.

2. Prayer of the petitioners is for quashing this advertisement, as requisite qualification mentioned in the advertisement do not mention about 5/10 years practicing experience at Bar as requisite qualification for appointment as part- time lecturer rather it discloses that only candidates who have cleared NET or similar test as graded by UGC can apply.

3. Petitioners have been working as part time lecturer in Patna Law College for several years. Some ad hoc teachers of Patna Law College had filed C.W.J.C. No. 5598 of 2006 for a direction seeking permanency of their appointment and to make payment of remuneration for the time consumed in their re-selection. This writ application was disposed of directing the University to advertise vacancies and appoint teachers on the vacant posts of lecturers within a period of 6 months from the date of constitution of Selection Committee. University was restrained from engaging any person apart from existing permanent teachers on any basis, apart from the ad hoc basis in the college, after expiry of nine months from the date of the order. In order to meet this dead line, vacancies for appointment of part time teachers were advertised. In this advertisement there is no provision for appointing practicing advocates as part-time teachers, having 5/10 years practicing experience at bar. In the notice published by Patna University dated 6.1.2009, only those persons are eligible 10 apply who besides fulfilding other qualifications have cleared the NET or similar test as graded by University NET and Ph.D. being made compulsory requirement for submitting applications, candidates other than those who have not cleared NET and Ph.D. are debarred from applying for the post.

4. The impugned notice has been challenged on the ground that it is against the Governemnts own resolution contained in Memo No. 1581 dated 10.6.1976 relating to part time lecturers of the University and affiliated law colleges of Bihar. Petitioners case is that notice is also against revised . statutes of Patna University amended and approved by the Chancellor dated 15.12.1999, whereby only practicing advocates could be appointed as part-time lecturers in Law Colleges. Notice published by Patna University dated 6.1.2009 has been assailed by petitioners stating that requisite qualification as mentioned in the notice, in a way completely debars advocates, having 5/10 years experience from applying for the post.

5. Counsel for the petitioners has contended that the University and its authorities while inviting applications for appointment of part-time lecturers did not consider that law teaching cannot be equated with general course of humanity or other social sciences. Law is professional course and its teaching is specialized teaching. Considering this aspect only, Bar Council of India was empowered under Section 7(h) and (i) of Advocates Act to promote, lay down standard and decide syllabus of law teaching in consultation with the Universities of India, imparting such education. Under the Bar Council of India Rules requisite qualification for appointing Principal and full-time teachers of Law Colleges is Master Degree in law. But so far part-time teachers are concerned, graduate in law with minimum experience of five years practice at Bar for bachelor course and 10 years experience for master course has been decided as requisite qualification. Revised statute contained in letter No. BSU- 25\83-2377GS(i) dated 9.9.1998 and BSU- 1189-3748GS(i) dated 15.1