Statutory rules govern appointments, and an erroneous advertisement cannot confer rights contrary to established rules.

JUDGMENT :

Harish Kumar, J.

Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner was duly appointed against the post of Finance Officer, Aryabhatta Knowledge University for the period of five years in terms with the Appointment Advertisement No. 1/2019. Admitting the terms of the appointment letter dated 18.06.2020 that he would again be eligible for reappointment and accordingly in terms of the provision as contained in Section 7(b) of Chapter-I of the Statutes of the University prescribed in the Bihar Gazette (extra) dated 27.05.2011, the petitioner has been reappointed for the next five years under Memo No. 2922 dated 14.06.2025.

3. However, on a question having been raised by one Santosh Kumar Sharma regarding eligibility of the appointment of the petitioner, the Court of the University in its 28^th Meeting dated 26.08.2025 took a fresh decision for publication of a new advertisement for the selection and appointment against the post of Finance Officer in the University. The afore noted decision of the Court dated 26.08.2025 is put to challenge before this Court. The petitioner further sought quashing of the recruitment notice bearing Appointment Advertisement No. 3/2025 dated 27.09.2025 published by the University for selection and appointment against the post of Finance Officer and further sought quashing of letter No. 5128 dated 27.09.2025 by which the petitioner has been communicated that since he does not possess the requisite qualification for the post of Finance Officer under the Statutes of the University, so fresh Advertisement No. 3/2025 has been advertised by the University, and till fresh appointment the petitioner is directed to discharge his duties against the post of Finance Officer of the University.

4. Mr. Mrigank Mauli, learned Senior Advocate for the petitioner while assailing the impugned decision and the recruitment advertisement, submitted that for appointment against the post of Finance Officer in the Appointment Advertisement No. 1/2019, the Screening Committee duly constituted by the University had found the application form of the petitioner in order and thereupon the Selection Committee consisted of the Vice Chancellor, Nominee of the Chancellor, State Government Nominee, two members of the Executive Council nominated by the Vice Chancellor and one member of the SC/ST/OBC having academic interest nominated by the State Government, found the petitioner eligible on the basis of his educational qualification and his performance in the interview as well as the work experience. On the basis of the merit list, the Executive Council of the University in its 40^th Meeting dated 18.06.2020 resolved and took a decision to appoint the petitioner against the post of Finance Officer.

5. Referring to Section 7(a) of Chapter-I of the Statutes of the University, learned Senior Advocate submitted that the Finance Officer is to be appointed by the Executive Council on the recommendation of the Selection Committee of the University and thus after all the formalities having been duly completed, the petitioner was appointed for five years. In the meanwhile, the appointment of the petitioner is questioned in a Public Interest Litigation bearing CWJC No. 19565 of 2021, which came to be disposed of vide order dated 06.01.2022 with a direction to approach the Vice Chancellor of the University. The Vice Chancellor of the University found and observed, appointment of the petitioner legal and valid, in accordance with the prescription as provided in the Aryabhatta Knowledge University Act and the Statutes of the University. The order