1998 Supreme(Raj) 1119

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT AT JAIPUR BENCH
Arun Madan, J.
Samajik Nyaya Shodh Sansthan, etc. - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan and other - Respondent
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.760 of 1996, alongwith 9 other connected.
Decided On : 27-05-1998

Headnote:

The Rajasthan Agriculture University Act, 1987 (Act No. 39/1987) (for short "the Act") published in Rajasthan Gazette Extraordinary, Part HA dated 8.11.1987 by which the University was established by the State of Rajasthan at Bikaner for the development of Agriculture including animal husbandry and allied Science in the said State for the purpose of extending the benefit of the reservation to the extent of 21% to reserved categories candidates, i.e., SC/ST/OBC in accordance with Section 10A of the Act.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioners in the aforesaid writ petitions have raised common grievance as regards the approach of the respondent-University in the matter of appointments of the aforesaid candidates in the matter of selection for appointment on the post of Assistant Professors/ Associate Professors & professors in various specialities offered by the University is also common, the grievance urged by them as against the approach adopted by the respondent-University in the matter of selection for appointment of the candidates who had applied for various posts of Assistant Professors/ Associate Professors & Professors in various specialities offered by the University is also common.

Finding of the Court:

The entire process evolved by the respondent university in making selections in pursuance of Advertisement No. 2/95 dated 27.5.1995 in my view was absolutely legal and justified and in consonance with the law and spirit of the provisions of the statutes as referred to above and in accordance with the observations of the Apex Court as referred to above and no infirmity, illegality, arbitrariness or unreasonableness can be attributed to the same.

Issues: 1. Whether the respondent-university in its Advertisement Nos. 1/95 & 2/95 dated 25.7.1995 has complied with the requirements of the statute, i.e., the Rajasthan Agricultural Universities Act, 1987 (Act No. 39/1987) (for short "the Act") published in Rajasthan Gazette Extraordinary, Part HA dated 8.11.1987 by which the University was established by the State of Rajasthan at Bikaner for the development of Agriculture including animal husbandry and allied Science in the said State for the purpose of extending the benefit of the reservation to the extent of 21% to reserved categories candidates, i.e., SC/ST/OBC in accordance with Section 10A of the Act ? 2. Whether the Selection Committee constituted by the respondent-University for selection of the candidates for various posts as advertised by it was in accordance with law and requirements of the statute, particularly when some of the candidates who were seeking selection on the post of Director Research, Director of Extension and Dean in pursuance of Advertisement No. 1/95 dated 25/07/1995 (Annexure-3) who have been impleaded as a respondent No. 4.2 & 6 in category- B as departmental candidate; had participated in the process of selection as permanent members ? 3. Whether it was open and permissible to aforesaid applicants to have so participated in the selection process in contravention of clause B of Statute 12 of the Act, 1987 ? 4. Whether the constitution of the Selection Committees was made in accordance with law and hence the entire selections made are vitiated since respondents Nos. 4 to 6 had acted in collusion and under the pressure of respondent No.3 ? 5. Whether the selection of the successful candidates made by the respondent university can be termed as manipulated as so alleged by the petitioners since respondent No.3 was Chairman of the Selection Committees for making selections on various posts as referred to above in which respondent Nos. 4 to 6 were the applicants themselves and hence disqualified to participate in the selection process ? 6. Whether the formula applied by the various selection committees constituted by the University vide Annexure C-2 can be termed as proper and valid in the matter of selection of candidates who were recommended for appointment on different posts since there was no provision for awarding the marks on the basis of grade point average in bachelors degree whereas in additional affidavit dated 17.03.1997 filed on behalf of the respondent university it has been contended that the selection committees followed the matter of granting marks on the basis of grade point average in Bachelors degree ? 7. Whether the criteria of 'correction factor' applied by the respondent university in favour of the successful candidates out of 2000 candidates who had appeared before the various committees and had participated in the process of selection can be said to be proper and valid, particularly when the entire exercise of awarding marks on the basis of the formula also applying correction factor could not be done regularly on rough paper since score-sheets were prepared by the examiners with respect to each of the candidates were duly signed by the respective members of the selection committees and it is otherwise inconceivable as to how large scale markings had been done by the selection committees in volume without averting the same on the papers ? 8. Whether any manipulations were made by the respondent university as so alleged by the petitioners in the aforesaid writ petitions by awarding higher marks to favourite candidates applying the correctional factor to various candidates shown in Annexure R/A ? 9. Whether the candidates who had participated in the process of selection in pursuance of the impugned advertisement as referred to above, for various posts offered by the respondent university and subsequently not declared successful have any locus-standi to move to this court by way of the aforesaid writ petitions on various grounds of challenge as referred to in the writ petitions ? 10. Whether any personal injury can be said to have been caused to the petitioners as a result of their non-selections by the selection committees as set up by the respondent university on any of the grounds as raised in the writ petition after having taken calculated chance and appeared in the entire selection process i.e. written test, interview etc. and whether any vested legal right can be said to have accrued to such candidates ? 11. Whether the writ petitions are not maintainable in the present form without impleading affected and interested parties, i.e., the candidates who are declared successful and hence not maintainable on the ground of non-joinder & mis-joinder of necessary parties ?

Ratio Decidendi: The Rajasthan Agriculture University Act, 1987 (Act No. 39/1987) (for short "the Act") published in Rajasthan Gazette Extraordinary, Part HA dated 8.11.1987 by which the University was established by the State of Rajasthan at Bikaner for the development of Agriculture including animal husbandry and allied Science in the said State for the purpose of extending the benefit of the reservation to the extent of 21% to reserved categories candidates, i.e., SC/ST/OBC in accordance with Section 10A of the Act.

Final Decision: The writ petitions being devoid of merit are dismissed with no order as to costs.