Back
AKIL KURESHI, UMA SHANKER VYAS
Mali Ram Hindala – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT
1. These petitions arising out of similar facts have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. For convenience facts may be noted from Civil Writ Petition No.307/2021. The grievance of the petitioners is that the State Government has not followed the UGC guidelines contained in its Regulations dated 18.07.2018 in relation to the recruitment for the post of Assistant Professor advertised by the Rajasthan State Public Service Commission on 18.12.2020.
2. The petitioners seek appointment on the post of Assistant Professor Botany or Zoology as the case may be. They point out that earlier regulations of UGC called UGC Regulations on Minimum Qualifications For Appointment Of Teachers and Other Academic Staff in Universities And Colleges and Measures For the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education, 2010 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the UGC Regulations of 2010') recognised only Master's degree in the relevant subject as the eligibility condition. The UGC however superseded these UGC Regulations of 2010 by UGC Regulations on Minimum Qualifications For Appointment Of Teachers and Other Academic Staff in Universities And Colleges and Measures For th
The UGC Regulations of 2018 must be adhered to by the State Government in recruitment processes, as they provide broader eligibility criteria than previous regulations.
UGC regulations are mandatory for UGC-funded institutions but directory for State-run institutions unless formally adopted.
The court emphasized that the equivalence of qualifications is in the exclusive domain of the recruiting authority and cannot be determined through judicial review.
Point of Law : UGC regulations - There was no provision in the M.G. University Law for fixing the tenure of appointment of Principals as deemed to be permanent nature.
Recruitment criteria set by a state university cannot derogate from UGC regulations, and weightage modifications post-amendment leading to absurdities are impermissible.
The court upheld the validity of the age limit and subject-specific qualifications for Assistant Professors, affirming adherence to UGC guidelines and judicial directives.
The court upheld the validity of the age limit and subject-specific qualifications for Assistant Professor positions, emphasizing adherence to UGC guidelines as a binding standard for recruitment pro....
A recruitment notification's eligibility criteria must align with established regulations, and any restrictions not prescribed by the UGC guidelines are impermissible.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
