IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR AT SRINAGAR
Tashi Rabstan, J.
Irfan Ahmad Bhat and Others – Appellants
Versus
SKUAST and Others – Respondents
LPASW No.118/2018
CM No.1027/2019 [01/2019]
IA No.01/2018
Decided On : 07-12-2019
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 14 and 16 - UGC Act - Section 4 - J&K High Court Rules, 1999 - Rule 36 - Controversy - Advertisement - Very outset let it be mentioned that on account of dissenting and divergent views expressed by two Judges of this Court comprising Justice and Justice Rashid Ali Dar in an Appeal diarized and registered as LPASW Chief Justice has referred this Appeal in exercise J&K High Court Rules and that is how Single Bench is constituted to call upon to decide determine and adjudicate upon controversy in hand has proposed to allow Appeal and set-aside learned Writ Court judgment whereas Justice Rashid Ali Dar proposed to dismiss Appeal of appellants petitioners - Held Above quoted communication addressed to Chief Secretaries of all States does not require m but request to consider adopting and implementing UGC Regulations in respect of State Agricultural Universities - On face of it re is no clear-cut directive to States or say J&K to compulsorily adopt and implement UGC Regulations in letter and spirit - Language contained in afore-quoted communication is clear and conspicuous - It does not bind or force States or say SKUAST to adopt and implement UGC Regulations - It only requests States including J&K to consider adoption and implementation of UGC Regulations –As regards question/issue would like to say that endorsement bearing does not entail any direction to States or J&K to compulsorily and mandatorily adopt and implement UGC Regulations - It only requests States to consider adopting and implementing UGC Regulations - UGC Regulations are recommendatory in nature and therefore State Legislatures nor State Government/s that includes SKUAST are bound to accept same - Non-adoption of directory UGC Regulations therefore does not render SKUAST Statute/Rules invalid or unconstitutional - Have already referred to observations and findings of Supreme Court in that UGC Regulations are not applicable to Universities Colleges and or higher educational institutions coming under purview of State Legislature unless State Government wish to adopt and implement scheme - Appeal dismissed
Judgment
1. At the very outset, let it be mentioned that on account of dissenting and divergent views expressed by two learned Judges of this Court, comprising Hon’ble Mr Justice Sanjeev Kumar and Hon’ble Mr Justice Rashid Ali Dar, in an Appeal, diarised and registered as LPASW no.118/2018, Hon’ble the Chief Justice, has referred this Appeal, in exercise of Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 36 of the J&K High Court Rules, 1999, and that is how, this Single Bench is constituted to call upon to decide, determine and adjudicate upon the controversy in hand. Hon’ble Mr Justice Sanjeev Kumar has proposed to allow the Appeal and set-aside learned Writ Court judgement dated 10thAugust 2018, whereas Hon’ble Mr Justice Rashid Ali Dar (now retired) proposed to dismiss the Appeal of appellants/writ petitioners.
2. The Hon’ble Judges have come up with three questions for determination by the Third Judge, to be designated for the purpose by Hon’ble the Chief Justice, which are:
(2) Whether the UGC Regulations, 2010, more particularly, Regulation 4.4.1, which lays down the Minimum Qualification for Appointment and other service conditions of the Universities and Colleges Teachers etc. for Maintenance of Standards of Higher Education, 2010, are applicable to the Faculty of Agriculture and Veterinary Science of the Agricultural Universities like SKAUST-K in view of the endorsement of these Regulations by the Govt. of India, Ministry of Agricultural vide its F.No. 1(01)/2009-Per-IV to the State Government to consider adopting and implementing the same in respect of the State Agricultural Universities?
(3) Whether the Statute of SKAUST-K providing eligibility qualification contrary to the one prescribed by the UGC Regulations duly endorsed by the Govt. of India, Ministry of Agricultural to all the Agricultural Universities to adopt and implement the same in respect of the Agricultural Universities in the State is sustainable in law and if not whether the same can be held to be bad even if there is no specific challenge laid to such Statute in the writ petition.
3. Though recapitulation of factual background would superfluously verbose this judgement, yet it is imperative to have bird’s eye view of the case set up by parties before learned Writ Court. Discourse on all minutiae and facets concerning instant case has been made by both, learned Single Bench and learned Division Bench.Nevertheless, difference of opinion of the Hon’ble Judges of the Division Bench, who have made present Reference, is to be gone through and squared off here so as to have a majority view.
4. Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences & Technology of Kashmir, Main Campus, Shalimar, Srinagar, (for succinctness “SKUAST”) by an Advertisement Notice no.01 of 2017 dated 13th March 2017, invited applications in the prescribed format from eligible candidates for filling up the posts of Assistant Professors-cum-Junior Scientists in the Fish Endocrinology, Toxicology, Limnology, Aquaculture, Fish Breeding, PHT, Fish Biochemistry, Fish Parasitology, Gear & Craft, Sericulture, Vegetable Science, Statistics, Forestry. The essential qualification, as is noticeable from Advertisement Notice, is:
i) Master degree with minimum 55% marks or equivalent grade in OGPA or equivalent postgraduate qualification in the concerned/related subject.;
ii) PhD degree (with course work) in concerned/related subject as
Dilip Kumar Ghosh and others v. Chairman and others
Annamalai University v. Secy to Government, Inf. & Tourism Department and others
Kalyani Mathivanan v. K.V. Jeyaraj and others
State of Tamil Nadu and another v. Adhiyhaman Education & Research Institute and others
Annamalai University v. Secy. to Govt. Infn. & Tourism Department & others
Kalyani Mathivanan v. K.V. Jeyaraj and others
PGF Ltd v. Union of India (2015) 13 SCC 50. (Para 10.25) – Referred.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.