SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(Mad) 2547

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
C.V. KARTHIKEYAN, J.
Shine S. Nair – Appellant
Versus
Perunthalaivar Kamaraj Medical College Society, Puducherry. Rep. By its Chief Secretary, Pondicherry & Others – Respondents
W.P. No. 13412 of 2016 & W.M.P. Nos. 11761 & 11762 of 2016
Decided On : 01-08-2023

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:Ravikumar Paul, Advocate, Paul & Paul Associates. For the Respondents:R1 & R2, R. Syed Mustafa, Government Pleader (Puducherry), R3, V.R. Kamalanathan, Advocate.

Educational qualifications are essential for ensuring the quality of education and should not be overridden by teaching experience alone.

Headnote:

Qualification - Associate Professor Selection - Kaumarbhritya - [CCIM norms, PG degree in Kaumarbhritya, teaching experience] - The court found that the third respondent did not possess the essential qualification of a PG degree in Kaumarbhritya, as required by the notification for the post of Associate Professor. The court also highlighted the importance of educational qualifications in ensuring the quality of education and directed the immediate withdrawal of the selection of the third respondent and the appointment of the petitioner as Associate Professor in Kaumarbhritya.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought to challenge the selection and appointment of the third respondent as Associate Professor in the Kaumarbhritya subject, claiming that the third respondent did not possess the necessary qualifications. The petitioner, who had the required qualifications, was placed on the waiting list.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the third respondent did not possess the essential qualification of a PG degree in Kaumarbhritya, as required by the notification for the post of Associate Professor. The court also highlighted the importance of educational qualifications in ensuring the quality of education and directed the immediate withdrawal of the selection of the third respondent and the appointment of the petitioner as Associate Professor in Kaumarbhritya.

Issues: The main issue was the qualification of the third respondent for the post of Associate Professor in Kaumarbhritya, as the petitioner claimed that the third respondent did not possess the necessary qualifications.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the significance of educational qualifications in the field of education and held that the third respondent's teaching experience did not override the requirement of a PG degree in Kaumarbhritya for the post of Associate Professor.

Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, directed the immediate withdrawal of the selection of the third respondent, and ordered the appointment of the petitioner as Associate Professor in Kaumarbhritya with all attendant benefits.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus after calling for the connected records, quashing of the order of selection and appointment of the 3rd respondent vide order No.7-60-RAGMC/2015 dated 04.03.2016 by the 2nd respondent, in so far as the post of Associate Professor is concerned, as illegal and void and for consequential direction to respondents 1 and 2 to appoint the petitioner as Associate Professor in the Kaumarbhritya subject in pursuance of selection through notification dated 30.12.2015 with all attendant benefits.)

1. Writ petition has been filed in the nature of a certiorarified mandamus seeking interference with the selection and appointment of the third respondent by proceedings / order No.7 - 60/ RAGMC / 2015 dated 04.03.2016 of the second respondent qua the post of Associate Professor and for a consequential direction to the respondent nos. 1 and 2 to appoint the petitioner as Associate Professor in Kaumarbhritya, consequent to the notification dated 30.12.2015 and also grant all attendant benefits.

2. The petitioner had applied for the post of Associate Professor in the Union Territory of Puducherry in Rajiv Gandhi Ayurveda Medical College at Mahe for the post of Associate Professor in Kaumarbhritya / Balroga subject. The notification was dated 30.12.2015. The educational qualifications required for being eligible to be considered for appointment to the said post of Associate Professor was Ayurveda Vachaspathi (MD) Ayurveda in the concerned subject and in this case the concerned subject was Kaumarbhritya / Balroga from a recognized university approved by the Central Council of Indian Medicine (hereinafter referred to as ''CCIM''), a statutory body under the Ministry of Ayush, Government of India and also five years'' experience as Senior Lecturer or as Associate Professor in teaching in the said subject or ten years'' of combined experience in teaching in the said subject and also research. Desirable qualifications were Ph.D in Ayurveda and extensive experience in research and working knowledge of Hindi and English. It was also specified that the essential criteria which has been stated, namely, educational qualification in the concerned subject is a minimum requirement and possession of the same would not entitle for the candidates to be called for interview. It had also been provided that the competent authority would have the right to short list the candidates on the basis of the higher qualification or on the basis of years of experience in the subject or screening test or any other criteria. The age limit for application was prescribed as 50 years.

3. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, the petitioner claimed that he possessed the aforementioned educational qualification and also had necessary teaching experience as required. He very specifically stated that he had obtained a degree in Kaumarbhritya and also worked as Assistant Professor in Mannam Ayurveda Cooperative Medical College, Pandalam, in Kerala for a period of three years between June, 2010 – March, 2013 and thereafter as a Lecturer from 05.03.2013 till the date of filing of the writ petition in the second respondent medical college. He, therefore, claimed that having had the necessary qualifications prescribed for eligibility, he had a reasonable and legitimate expectation that he would be short-listed as among the candidates to be selected for the post of Associate Professor. The method of selection was viva voce which was conducted by, what is called, the Committee of the second respondent college. The petitioner claimed that he had done reasonably well in the said screening test.

4. The petitioner, however, found that the third respondent was selected to the said post and the petitioner was placed as waiting list candidate no.1. He still remains in the waiting list no.1 and the third respondent having been selected, is now working as Assoc

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top