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

2025 Supreme(KER) 921

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
N.NAGARESH, J
P.S.gopakumar S/o Balakrishna Pillai - Appellant
Versus
Chancellor, University Of Kerala - Respondent
WP(C) NO. 36283 OF 2024
Decided On : 03-02-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : BY ADVS. P.ANIRUDHAN SANTHEEP ANKARATH
For the Respondent: BY ADVS. S.PRASANTH THOMAS ABRAHAM-R2 AND R3 P.SREEKUMAR (SR.)-R1 SRI. PREMCHAND R. NAIR, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The constitution of the Selection Committee for Assistant Professors must comply with UGC Regulations, which require the Vice Chancellor to chair the committee.

Headnote:(A) UGC (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and other Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education) Regulations, 2018 - Regulation 5.1 - Constitution of Selection Committee for Assistant Professors - The University constituted a Selection Committee contrary to UGC Regulations, which mandates the Vice Chancellor or nominee to chair the committee. The petitioner, a Syndicate member, challenged the legality of the committee's formation. (Paras 3, 9, 10)

(B) Locus Standi - The petitioner lacks locus standi to challenge the decision of the Syndicate in court as a member of the Syndicate. (Paras 6, 11)

(C) Compliance with Regulations - The court emphasized that the University must adhere to UGC Regulations regarding faculty appointments, limiting contract appointments to exceptional circumstances. (Paras 10, 12)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to quash the minutes of a Syndicate meeting that formed a Selection Committee for Assistant Professors, arguing it violated UGC Regulations.

Findings of Court:
The court found the committee's formation illegal as it did not comply with UGC Regulations, leading to the quashing of the minutes and any consequential actions.

Issues: The main issues were the legality of the Selection Committee's formation and the petitioner's standing to challenge it.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the UGC Regulations must be followed in forming the Selection Committee, and the petitioner, being a Syndicate member, could not invoke Article 226 for this challenge.

Result: The writ petition is allowed, and the minutes of the meeting are set aside.

JUDGMENT :

The petitioner, who is a member of the Syndicate of the University of Kerala, has approached this Court seeking to quash Ext.P1 Minutes of the meeting of the Standing Committee of the Syndicate held on 07.06.2024 to the extent of formation of the Selection Committee constituted for appointment of Assistant Professors on contract basis.

2. Ext.P1 Minutes of the meeting of the Standing Committee of the Syndicate would indicate that the University has decided to constitute a Selection Committee for the selection of Assistant Professors on contract basis in each Department consisting of the following members:

1. Convenor, Standing Committee of the Syndicate on Staff, Equipment and Buildings

2. Registrar

3. Head of the Department concerned

4. Subject expert

3. The petitioner would submit that the University Grants Commission has framed the UGC (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and other Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education) Regulations, 2018. As per Regulation 5.1, a Selection Committee for appointment to the post Assistant Professor should be chaired by the Vice Chancellor or his nominee. The constitution of the Selection Committee is also different. Respondents 1 to 3 are bound to follow the UGC Regulations in the matter of selection. That is not being done. Ext.P1 and all consequential action thereon are liable to be set aside, contends the petitioner.

4. Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of respondents 2 and 3 and resisted the writ petition. On behalf of respondents 2 and 3, it is submitted that the meeting of the Standing Committee of the Syndicate on Staff, Equipment and Buildings, held on 07.06.2024, considered the proposals for selection of Assistant Professors and decided to engage 16 Assistant Professors on contract basis in various Departments for handling courses under Four Year Undergraduate Programs in 15 subjects (excluding Hindi).

5. The Committee also decided to constitute a Selection Committee for the selection of Assistant Professors on contract basis in each Department consisting of Convenor, Standing Committee of the Syndicate on Staff, Equipment and Buildings, Registrar, Head of the Department concerned and Subject Expert. The Committee also recommended to seek concurrence from the Government for engaging faculties in project mode for handling Four Year UG Program offered in the corresponding Departments. There is nothing illegal in the constitution of the Committee.

6. The Standing Counsel further pointed out that the petitioner is a member of the Syndicate and if the petitioner has any grievance relating to the administration of the University, the petitioner has to make a submission before the Syndicate. Being part of the Syndicate, the petitioner cannot approach this Court invoking Article 226 of the Constitution of India for challenging the majority decision of the Syndicate. The petitioner has no locus standi. The writ petition is liable to be dismissed for that reason alone.

7. Standing Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent submitted that in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in WA No.96 of 2022, the University Authorities are bound to follow the UGC Regulations even if the appointment to the post of Assistant Professors is on contract basis.

8. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, respective learned Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents and the learned Senior Government Pleader representing the 4th respondent.

9. Ext.P2 is the UGC (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and other Measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education) Regulations, 2018. Regulation 5.1 relates to Selection Committee composition of Assistant Professors in the University. Clause 5.1(I) reads as follows:

5.1 Selection Committee Composition:

I. Assistant Professor in the University:

(a) The Selection Committ

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