Back
Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
T. RAJA, J.
Dr. A. Deivendran & Others
Versus
The Madurai Kamaraj University, Represented by the Registrar i/c & Another
W.P(MD) Nos. 10392, 11151, 12842 & 11225 of 2013 & Connected Miscellaneous Petitions
Decided On : 29-11-2013
Advertisement - Recruitment - Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of seats in educational institutions and appointments or posts in the Service under the State) Act, 1993 - Chapter VII, Chapter XXXII of Madurai Kamaraj University Statutes - The court discussed the correctness of the impugned notification issued by the Madurai Kamaraj University treating each department in the Directorate of Distance Education as a single unit, and the application of the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of seats in educational institutions and appointments or posts in the Service under the State) Act, 1993. The court analyzed the provisions of Chapter VII and Chapter XXXII of the Madurai Kamaraj University Statutes, and the application of the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of seats in educational institutions and appointments or posts in the Service under the State) Act, 1993, in the context of the impugned advertisement for recruitment to the posts of Assistant Professor in various departments in the Directorate of Distance Education.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the impugned notification issued by the Madurai Kamaraj University treating each department in the Directorate of Distance Education as a single unit, and sought to quash the same with the consequential direction to consider the vacancies in the Directorate of Distance Education as a single unit and re-advertise the vacancies. The petitioners argued that the approach adopted by the University was against the statutes of the University and the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of seats in educational institutions and appointments or posts in the Service under the State) Act, 1993.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the Directorate of Distance Education (DDE) was functioning as separate units with the approval of the University Syndicate, and the faculty of DDE were not given representation in the Senate and the Academic Council. The court held that the DDE could not be treated as a single unit for the purpose of recruitment, as it was not permissible under Chapter XXXII of the Madurai Kamaraj University Statutes. The court also emphasized that there cannot be any reservation in a single post cadre, as per the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of seats in educational institutions and appointments or posts in the Service under the State) Act, 1993.
Issues: The issues involved in the case were the correctness of the impugned notification treating each department in the Directorate of Distance Education as a single unit, the application of the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of seats in educational institutions and appointments or posts in the Service under the State) Act, 1993, and the compliance with the provisions of Chapter VII and Chapter XXXII of the Madurai Kamaraj University Statutes.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the Directorate of Distance Education (DDE) could not be treated as a single unit for the purpose of recruitment, as it was not permissible under Chapter XXXII of the Madurai Kamaraj University Statutes. The court also emphasized that there cannot be any reservation in a single post cadre, as per the Tamil Nadu Backward Classes Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Reservation of seats in educational institutions and appointments or posts in the Service under the State) Act, 1993.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions and directed the results for the interview to be declared. The court found that the impugned advertisement was legal and the communal roster fixed was in order, as the University had rightly followed the vertical reservation wherever applicable in filling up the posts of Assistant Professor in various departments by treating each department as a separate unit.
1. Challenging the correctness of the impugned notification issued by the Madurai Kamaraj University in Advertisement Nos.R 35 to 52/MKU/DDE/2013 made in publications dated 27.04.2013 and 28.04.2013, treating each department in the Directorate of Distance Education as a single unit, these writ petitions have been filed to quash the same with the consequential direction to the respondents to consider the vacancies in the Directorate of Distance Education as a single unit and thereupon to work out the roster for reservation and re-advertise the vacancies in the 2nd respondent/Directorate of Distance Education, within the time to be stipulated by this Court.
2. Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in all these writ petitions, heavily assailing the impugned advertisement calling for applications for recruitment to the posts of Assistant Professor to various departments in the 2nd respondent/Directorate of Distance Education (hereinafter referred to as DDE), termed the approach adopted by the Madurai Kamaraj University as highly arbitrary, as the said approach is against the statues of the 1st respondent/Madurai Kamaraj University (hereinafter referred to as University). When Chapter VII of the statutes of the University clearly provides that there are 18 schools with 72 departments in the University, the 2nd respondent/DDE is not part of the same, inasmuch as the institute of correspondence course and continuing education is a separate and independent unit. Moreover, as per Chapter XXXII of the statutes of the University, the teachers of the institute are not transferable to University Department, resultantly, if any vacancy arises in the departments of the University, consequently, if any other teacher from the institute wants to apply, he/she has to apply separately and appear before the appropriate selection committee, therefore, it is clear that DDE is a separate and independent unit, hence the same cannot be divided into various departments.
3. Adding further, it was pleaded that the heads of department in the regular University are members of the Senate and the heads of the University Departments of Study and Research are Ex-officio members of the Academic Council, but it is not so with the 2nd respondent/DDE. When there are no separate departments and the heads of the departments of Directorate of Distance Education are not the members of the Senate and further when they are not the Ex-officio members of the Academic Council, it makes it clear that the Directorate of Distance Education is a single unit only.
4. Continuing his argument, he has further submitted that by the impugned advertisement seeking to fill up the posts of Assistant Professor in various departments lying in the Directorate of Distance Education, classifying the said directorate into 18 departments and following the roster has seriously resulted in giving most of the seats for general turn category. According to him, if 200 point roster system is followed in the instant recruitment drive for the 23 posts of Assistant Professor, five posts should be reserved for Scheduled Caste candidates, another five posts should be reserved for Most Backward Class candidates, yet another six posts should be reserved for Backward Class candidates and only seven posts are to be earmarked for general turn, however, contrary to that, the 1st respondent/University has wrongly sub classified the 2nd respondent/DDE into several departments claiming all the posts are single cadre posts, hence the same cannot be justified. By not treating the 2nd respondent/DDE as a single unit, earmarking most of the posts of Assistant Professor for general turn terribly curtails the right of reservation to SC/ST, BC and MBC candidates.
5. Again attacking the approach adopted by the 1st respondent/University, he pleaded that when the posts of Assistant Professor are purely single cadre posts, they cannot stand to the scrutiny of law, for the reason tha
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
