Judicial review applies when selection processes lack transparency; rejection must be justified, especially when only one candidate is eligible. Arbitrary outcomes violate equal opportunity principles.

ORDER :

C.V.KARTHIKEYAN, J.

The Writ Petition has been filed in the nature of a Certiorarified Mandamus seeking records of the order of the first respondent dated 18.12.2023 and quash the same and direct the first respondent to appoint the petitioner to the post of Professor, Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Policy as per the Notification/Advertisement in Advt.No. PU/RC/2019/34, dated 05.08.2019. The petitioner claims that he is an eligible candidate and also seeks to give effect to the reservation policy.

2. In the affidavit filed in support of the Writ Petition, it had been stated that the petitioner was serving as Associate Professor and Head of the Department of Economics at Erode Arts and Science College, a Government aided College at Erode. The first respondent had called for online applications on 05.08.2019 in advertisement No. PU/RC/2019/34 inviting applications from candidates, for the post of Professor under SC category in the Centre for Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Policy.

3. It had been contended specifically by the petitioner that since the inception of the said Centre in the year 2009, the post of Professor which had been reserved for SC category had not been filled up and the petitioner had raised a ground that such non filling up of the post had defeated the intention and purpose of the creation of the said Centre by the University. The said post has been treated as a backlog vacancy from the date of commencement of the Centre.

4. The petitioner had applied for the position of Professor in response to the advertisement. He was invited for the interview which was held on 21.11.2022. He was the only candidate, who attended the interview. The other candidate, who was also short listed did not attend the interview.

5. The petitioner claims that he had the requisite UGC prescribed qualifications. He had 32 years of teaching experience and was serving as Associate Professor and Head of Department while the UGC regulations stipulated just 10 years of teaching experience.

6. The petitioner had published 13 books on Economics, 7 books on Education and Economics in Tamil, 17 articles in Peer-Reviewed Journals and 7 book Chapters in Edited Books. He had also published more than 51 articles in Hindu Tamil and Minnambalam online daily. Most of the books and articles in English and Tamil related to Social Exclusion and Inclusive Policy. The petitioner had pointed out that the UGC regulations stipulated only a minimum of 10 articles or books.

7. The petitioner had acquired an API score of 397 while the UGC prescribed a minimum of 120.

8. The UGC guidelines required that the candidate must have guided atleast one Ph.D Research Scholar. The petitioner had guided 9 Ph.D Research Scholars and 12 M.Phil Research Scholars.

9. The petitioner had also listed out the additional qualifications acquired by him. He had conducted 3 major research projects and tw