JUDGMENT :

Suneet Kumar, J.

1. Heard Sri T. Islam, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Shashank Shekhar Singh, learned Counsel for the respondent-University.

2. The instant intra Court appeal has been filed by the fifth respondent of the writ petition challenging the order of the learned Single Judge dated 08 December, 2022, whereby, the writ petition instituted by the petitioner/ first respondent, herein, was allowed, setting aside the appointment of the appellant on the post of Trained Graduate Teacher (Agriculture), at Aligarh Muslim University/School, for want of essential qualification i.e. B.Ed. degree.

3. Learned Counsel for the appellant submits that appellant came to be appointed on temporary basis as a Trained Graduate Teacher (Agriculture), (for short TGT), vide appointment letter dated 20 November, 2010. The appointment was for an academic session which continued on year to year basis and finally an advertisement dated 20 May, 2022, came to be issued by the third respondent – Directorate of School Education, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, (for short, “AMU”). The advertisement sought applications for various posts including TGT (Agriculture) for the session 2022 – 23. The qualification of the post, inter-alia, mandated that the candidate should have B.Ed. degree or equivalent from a recognized University. The advertisement further provided for age relaxation as per Kendriya Vidyalaya Sanghathan (KVS) norms, to various categories. It is agreed between the parties that the relaxation does not pertain to qualification for TGT (Agriculture). Pursuant to the advertisement, the first respondent/writ petitioner had applied for the post and it is not in a dispute that he fulfills the educational qualifications duly notified in the advertisement i.e. he was having B.Ed. degree. In any case, the appellant came to be selected on 16 July, 2022, on the recommendation made by the Local Selection Committee, despite not having B.Ed. degree. The validity of the selection/ appointment of the fifth respondent was challenged in writ petition.

4. Learned Single Judge in the impugned judgment noted that appellant is not having requisite minimum qualification i.e. B.Ed. degree and no relaxation with regard to the qualification was notified in the advertisement. Further, the counsel appearing for AMU submitted that there is no order with regard to relaxation of the eligibility conditions and neither, any relaxation was granted to the appellant. The writ petition accordingly came to be allowed. The relevant portion of the impugned order, reads as under :-

“10. Also, submission advanced by learned counsel for the respondent that the selection made is wholly temporary, carries no weight. Once the selection was required to be made in accordance with law, irrespective of the term for which it may have been made, that law must be seen to be fully applied. In any case, it is apparent that the respondent no.5 has continued on temporary basis for some time i.e. since 2020 against annual renewal/re-appointment.

11. In view of the above, present petition succeeds. It is allowed. ……..…”

5. In this backdrop, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant submits that since the appellant has continued on temporary basis from the academic session 2010-11, and being an internal candidate of the University is entitled to relaxation in qualification which was duly exercised by the Vice-Chancellor in exercise of power under Section 19 of the Aligarh Muslim University Act, 1920, (for short “Act, 1920”). Section 19 (3) of the Act, 1920, which is relevant for the case, reads as under :

19. The Vice-Chancellor :-

(1) …………………..

(2) …………….

(3) The Vice-Chancellor may, if he is of opinion that immediate action is necessary on any matter, exercise any power conferred on any authority of the University by or under this Act and shall report to such authority the action taken by him on such matter;

Provided that if the authority concerned is of opinion that such action ou