Back
S. SRIMATHY
T. Asenath Benitta – Appellant
Versus
Director of Collegiate Education, Chennai – Respondent
JUDGMENT
(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents to grant qualification approval for the petitioner's appointment as Lecturer (in other words called Assistant Professor) in Physics in the fourth respondent College with effect from the forenoon of 03.09.2009, and approval of her said appointment, releasing and paying to her, her salary and all other benefits within a time to be fixed by this Court.)
1. This Writ Petition has been filed for Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant qualification approval for the petitioner's appointment as Lecturer (Assistant Professor) in Physics in the fourth respondent College with effect from 03.09.2009 and grant appointment approval and consequently release the salary and other benefits.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was qualified with M.Sc., M.Phil. in Physics and she has registered for Ph.D. in Physics and likely to submit her thesis for the same in December 2014. The petitioner belongs to Backward Class community and Nadar Christian. The fourth respondent College is a Christian Religious Minority recognized Governmen
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of Ph.D., NET, or SLET for appointment as a Lecturer in Physics as per the UGC regulations.
The court upheld that the amended UGC regulations apply to appointments made after the lifting of the recruitment ban, confirming the appellant's ineligibility for the Assistant Professor position.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the government is not obligated to pay the salary of an individual appointed in a non-sanctioned post from the government grant.
Qualifications for lecturer appointments must be met at the time of appointment, and later-acquired qualifications do not retroactively qualify an individual.
The Court held that once a selection process for an educational post is conducted in accordance with regulations and others similarly situated have been granted approval, it is arbitrary and discrimi....
State authorities cannot selectively withhold approval of a duly selected candidate to an aided educational post where the individual is qualified, the vacancy is sanctioned, and parity exists with o....
The state cannot arbitrarily withhold approval for a duly selected candidate to a sanctioned post while granting approval to similarly situated candidates, especially when the selection committee fol....
State authorities cannot arbitrarily withhold approval for the appointment of a candidate selected in a duly sanctioned vacancy when similarly situated candidates have been granted approval, as this ....
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
