IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
SARAL SRIVASTAVA, SUDHANSHU CHAUHAN, JJ.
Dipanwita Singh Roy – Appellant
Versus
Union of India and Others – Respondents
Special Appeal No. 219 of 2025
Decided On : 16-02-2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initial appointment as associate professor. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 2. challenge to selection committee constitution. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 3. counterarguments by bhu. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 4. court's analysis on the selection committee's legality. (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 5. arguments on the urgency of vice chancellor's powers. (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 6. eligibility of selection committee members discussed. (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 7. discussion on breach of procedural requirements. (Para 32 , 34 , 35) |
| 8. final conclusion on bias in the selection process. (Para 36 , 37 , 38 , 39) |
| 9. further analysis on subject knowledge required. (Para 40 , 41 , 45 , 46) |
| 10. reiteration of the need for specific subject expertise. (Para 47 , 48 , 49 , 50 , 51) |
JUDGMENT :
SARAL SRIVASTAVA, J.
1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mohd. Yasin, learned counsel for the appellant, Sri Anant Kumar Tiwari, learned counsel for the respondent no.1, Sri Amit Sinha, learned counsel for respondent-Banaras Hindu University and Sri Ashish Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for private respondent.
2. The present appeal is directed against the judgement and order of learned Single Judge dated 18.02.2025 passed in Writ-A No.4884 of 2024 whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition of the appellant, who was petitioner in Writ-A No.4884 of 2024 before the learned Single Judge.
3. The case of the appellant in the writ petition was that appellant was initially appointed as Assistant Professor (Katthak) at Punjabi University, Patiala vide order dated 27.02.2009 (English translation of the appointment letter is enclosed with the writ petition). The appointment letter indicates that the post on which the appellant was appointed was Lecturer in the Department of Dance at Punjabi University, Patiala. The appellant pursuant to the Advertisement No.07/2014-15 issued by the Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi (hereinafter referred to as the ‘BHU’) inviting applications for several teaching posts including the post of Associate Professor (Dance) carrying Post Code No.2730 applied for appointment as Associate Professor.
4. The petitioner after having gone through the process of selection was selected as Associate Professor (Dance) by appointment order dated 03.10.2015 issued by the Deputy Registrar (Recruitment and Assessment Cell). The appellant in pursuance of the said appointment order joined as Associate Professor in the Department of Dance, Faculty of Performing Arts, BHU, Varanasi. The appointment of the appellant was on probation for a period of one year. The appellant was subsequently confirmed as Associate Professor by the order of Deputy Registrar (Admin.-Teaching) dated 22.02.2017.
5. The appellant while working as Associate Professor was also appointed as Head of the Department of Dance for the period of three years on rotational basis by order dated 23.11.2019 issued by the Assistant Registrar (General Administration). Presently, the appellant is working as Associate Professor in the Academic Level-13A.
6. On 01.09.2023, a Notification was issued by the Deputy Registrar of the BHU inviting applications on or before 30.09.2023 for consideration of promotion under Career Advancement Scheme to different academic levels including promotion to the post of Professor (Academic Level-14).
7. The appellant being eligible, applied in pursuance to the aforesaid Notification in the prescribed form. After requisite processing, the appellant was required to appear before the Selection Committee on 04.01.2024. The appellant appeared before the Selection Committee on the said date.
8. As per the averments made in the writ petition, there does not exist any Executive Council in the BHU for the past almost two years, due to which, the Vice Chancellor has been passing orders on the recommendations of the Selection Committee at his level.
9. The appellant being aggrieved by the constitution of Selection Comm


Dr. Triloki Nath Singh Vs. Dr. Bhagwan Din Misra & Others
A.K. Kraipak & Others Vs. Union of India & Others
Opto Circuit India Limited Vs. Axis Bank & Others
Employees State Insurance Corporation Vs. Union of India & Others
The constitution of a selection committee must ensure experts possess relevant subject knowledge, and any perceived bias or procedural irregularities in their formation can invalidate the entire sele....
The Vice-Chancellor is empowered to constitute a selection committee during an executive council absence, validating the committee's actions despite questions of expertise and bias.
The court ruled that the constitution of a Selection Committee does not require all experts to be from the specific subject area, as broader expertise is acceptable under the applicable regulations.
The composition of selection committees for academic positions must meet statutory requirements; violations permit candidates to challenge the process, regardless of their participation.
The reconstitution of a Selection Committee during an ongoing interview process is illegal and arbitrary, necessitating a fresh selection process.
The court held that the SCS Committee was properly constituted in accordance with the provisions of the JMI Act and the UGC Regulations, that the members of the SCS Committee were persons of eminence....
The appointment of a Vice-Chancellor must adhere to statutory procedures; claims of bias must be substantiated, and the Visitor's discretion in appointments is paramount.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.