IMPORTANT POINT
The court affirmed that the eligibility criteria for the appointment of a Vice Chancellor under the Bikaner Technical University Act, 2017, must be strictly adhered to, and that findings from an investigative committee hold significant weight in adjudicating claims of misconduct.

JUDGMENT :

1. This Public Interest Litigation (PIL) Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

“It is therefore, humbly prayed on behalf of petitioner that this writ petition for Public Interest Litigation may kindly be allowed and

a. by an appropriate, writ, order or direction may kindly be issued to appointment of the respondent no. 5 upon the post of Vice Chancellor of the Bikaner Technical University Bikaner may kindly be declared illegal, unconstitutional and against the provision of Section 11 of the Act of 2017.

b. by an appropriate, writ, order or direction may kindly be issued and the order dated 30.4.2021 (Annex-3) issued by Hon’ble Governor of State of Rajasthan Cum Chancellor of the Bikaner Technical University Bikaner may kindly be quashed and set aside. The post of the Vice Chancellor of the Bikaner Technical University Bikaner may kindly be declared vacate and the respondent no. 5 may kindly be removed according to the provision of section 11(A) of the Act of 2017.

c. by an appropriate, writ, order or direction may kindly be issued and the Director General of Police may kindly be directed to conduct the investigation upon the complaints of the petitioner made against the act and conduct of the respondent no. 5 with regard to prepare a false and fabricated document for appointment of the post of Vice-Chancellor.

d. That any other relief, which this Hon’ble Court deems fit, by which the petitioner may get full just may also be allowed.”

2. The petitioner is a resident of Hanumangarh District and has preferred this PIL petition, laying challenge to the appointment of respondents no. 5 as Vice Chancellor of respondent-Bikaner Technical University (hereinafter referred to as ‘University’).

2.1. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by learned counsel for the petitioner, are that the respondent no. 4-Registrar, Bikaner Technical University issued an advertisement for filling up the post of Vice Chancellor, whereafter, the Hon’ble Governor of Rajasthan (Chancellor of the University) vide order dated 30.04.2021 appointed the respondent no. 5-Dr. Ambrish Saran Vidhyarthi as Vice Chancellor of the University.

2.2. Thereafter, as soon as the petitioner came to know about the conduct of the respondents and that the respondent no. 5 was not qualified for the post in question, the petitioner submitted a detailed representation through E-mails to the concerned authority on various occasions seeking removal of the respondent no. 5 from the post in question, but all such efforts of the petitioner went in vain. Thus, being aggrieved thereby, the present PIL petition has been preferred claiming the afore-quoted reliefs.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent No. 5 is ineligible to hold the post of Vice chancellor of the University, in view of Section 11 of the Bikaner Technical University Act, 2017, which provides that no person shall be eligible to be appointed as Vice Chancellor unless he/she is having, in the field of technical education, an experience for a minimum period of 10 years as Professor in the University or College or 10 years experience of holding an equivalent position in a reputed research and/or academic administrative organization; but the respondent no. 5 is having lesser experience than required under the law; the University Grants Commission Regulations, 2018 also speaks about minimum 10 years experience for appointment on the post in question, and therefore, the appointment of the respondent no. 5 on the post in question is not justified in law.

3.1. Learned counsel further submitted that the conduct of the respondent no. 5 is also not good because allegations regarding certain administrative and financial irregularities have been levelled against him. It was also submitted that a criminal case has also been registered against the respondent no. 5 under Section 409 of the IPC.

3.2. Learned counsel also submitted t