The court upheld that equivalence certificates for foreign qualifications could be accepted post-application deadline without invalidating a candidate's eligibility, emphasizing respect for the expertise of selection committees.

JUDGMENT :

T.R. RAVI, J.

1. Both these writ petitions relate to the selection and appointment of Assistant Professor in International Relations and Politics in the 1^st respondent University (hereinafter referred to as the University). They are hence heard and disposed of together. The 4^th respondent in W.P.(C)No.3638 of 2020, arrayed as the 6^th respondent in W.P.(C)No.6261 of 2020, was selected for the post, and the petitioners in these two writ petitions are candidates who could not get selected. The parties are referred to as per their status in W.P.(C)No.6261 of 2020, which is treated as the main case. The reference to the exhibits is also as marked in W.P. (C)NO.6261 of 2020, except in the case of exhibits that are not produced in W.P.(C)No.6261 of 2020.

2. W.P.(C).No.3638 of 2020 has been filed with the following prayers:

“a. Call for the records leading to the passing of Exhibit P6 rank list and quash the same to the extent it includes the 4^th respondent as Rank. No.1 therein by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ direction or order.

b. Call for the records leading to the passing of Exhibit P12 and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, direction, or order.

c. Declare that Exhibits P9 and P9(a) documents submitted by the 4^th respondent for securing scores for interview for the post of Assistant Professor in furtherance to Exhibit P1 notification could not have been considered by the respondents 1 and 2 as the 4^th respondent failed to submit the Eligibility/Equivalency Certificate with respect to his M.Phil and Ph.D Degrees prior to the last date stipulated for submission of application in the selection notification and that the inclusion of the name of the 4^th respondent in Exhibit P6 ranked list is illegal.

d. Declare that Exhibit P9(a) Eligibility Certificate issued to the 4^th respondent by the 2^nd respondent, cannot be reckoned for awarding any score for selection in furtherance to Exhibit P1 notification as the same was not issued in accordance with Exhibit P10 Regulations.

e. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents 1 and 2 to cancel the appointment given to the 4th respondent on the basis of Exhibit P6, forthwith.

f. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the 2^nd respondent to appoint the petitioner to solitary post of Assistant Professor in the School of International Relations and Politics in furtherance to Exhibit Pl and in accordance with Exhibit P6 rank list, expeditiously.

g. grant such other reliefs which this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.”

3. W.P.(C)No.6261 of 2020 has been filed with the following prayers:

(i) to declare that the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Social Anthropology - "Spatial Reconfigurations and New Social Formations" from University of Bergen, Norway obtained by the 6th respondent has not been recognised as equivalent to Ph.D degree in International Relations and Politics awarded by any of the Universities established under any of the Universities in the Country and the Association of Indian Universities is not invested with any power or authority under any Act of Parliament or State Legislature or by any Rule, Ordinance or Statutes or by any executive Order passed by the Central Government or any State Government to recognise Ph.D degree awarded by the foreign Universities as equivalent to the Ph.D degrees awarded by the Universities established under the Central Act or Acts of States and Statutes thereunder;

(ii) to call for the records leading t