IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, A.C.J., VIVEK BHARTI SHARMA, J.
Dr. Avdhesh Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
State of Uttarakhand and others - Respondents
Writ Petition (S/B) No. 651 of 2024
Decided On : 05-11-2024
(A) Uttar Pradesh Krishi Evam Prodyogik Vishvidhyalaya Adhiniyam, 1958 - Section 36(1)(b) - Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1994 - Employment Notice No. A-27/2024 challenged for not applying reservation policy - Seniority alone does not entitle regular appointment as Dean; selection must follow advertisement as per Statute. (Paras 3, 4, 5, 6)
(B) Reservation Policy - Single post in cadre cannot be reserved; 100% reservation is impermissible as per Supreme Court precedents. (Paras 6, 10)
(C) Eligibility for Interview - Petitioner's candidature to be considered if meeting eligibility criteria. (Paras 12, 13)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, a senior professor, challenged the Employment Notice for Dean positions, claiming entitlement based on seniority, which was rejected based on statutory provisions.
Findings of Court:
The selection process was valid as per University Statute and State Notification.
Issues: Whether seniority alone suffices for appointment and the applicability of reservation policy.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that seniority does not guarantee regular appointment; reservation cannot apply to single posts.
Result: Writ petition disposed of.
JUDGMENT :
Manoj Kumar Tiwari, A.C.J.
By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:-
(ii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding and directing the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 restraining for the recruitment process of the post of Deans / Directors in College of Fisheries which has been advertised by the Employment Notice No. A-27/2024.
(iii) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 to withdraw the Employment Notice No. A-27/2024 and re-advertise as per the provisions of reservation roster and Reservation Act, 1994 including the total posts as a cadre of a one unit of G.B. Pantnagar University.
(iv) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Nos. 2 & 3 to call the petitioner, and consider the candidature of the petitioner on the post of Dean in College of Fisheries and permitted to participate in the selection process as per the Employment Notice No. A-27/2024.
(v) Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.
(vi) Award the cost of the petition to the petitioner.”
2. According to petitioner, he is the senior most professor serving in Department of Fisheries of Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, and presently, he is holding the position of Incharge-Dean by virtue of his seniority among professors serving in the said Department.
3. Petitioner has challenged Employment Notice No. A-27/2024 issued by the G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, whereby applications were invited for appointment as Dean in the College of Veterinary & Animal Sciences, College of Fisheries, and College of Agribusiness Management. According to the petitioner, since he is the senior most professor in Department of Fisheries, therefore, he is entitled to be appointed as a regular Dean by virtue of his seniority. The said contention, however, cannot be accepted in view of provision contained in Clause 3 of Chapter XIII of the Statute of the University and also the Notification dated 24.06.1989 issued by the State Government in exercise of powers under Section 36(1)(b) of Uttar Pradesh Krishi Evam Prodyogik Vishvidhyalaya Adhiniyam, 1958. The said Notification provides that upon occurrence of vacancy on the post of Dean in any faculty of the University, the senior most professor in the concerned Faculty will hold charge as Dean but only till regular selection. Clause 3 of Chapter XIII of the Statute also provides that appointment to the position of Dean shall be only after advertisement of the vacancy in at least three newspapers. Thus, no one can claim regular appointment as Dean merely by virtue of his / her seniority, and seniority would be relevant only for officiating appointment as Dean, till the post is filled by regular selection.
4. In the present case, regular selection is proposed to be made, for which applications have been invited. The procedure, adopted by the University, is as per the Statute and Notification dated 24.06.1989 issued by the State Government. Therefore, the selection process, initiated by the University, cannot be faulted. Petitioner’s seniority amongst professors has resulted in his officiating appointment as Dean, however, for regular appointment, he has to face selection as per the Statute.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, then, contended that reservation policy has not been applied in the impugned advertisement and not a single vacancy has been reserved for candidate belonging to Scheduled Caste category. This, according to learned counsel for the petitioner, is violative of Uttar Pradesh Public Services (Reservation for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act
Union of India v. Brij Lal Thakur
State of U.P. and others vs. Bharat Singh and others
State of Uttar Pradesh and others vs. M.C. Chattopadhyay and others
R.K. Sabharwal vs. State of Punjab
Arati Ray Choudhury v. Union of India
M.R. Balaji v. State of Mysore
T. Devadasan v. Union of India
Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education & Research, Chandigarh v. Faculty Association and Ors.
Union of India and Anr. v. Madhav S/o Gajanan Chaubal and Anr.
Seniority does not guarantee regular appointment; selection must follow statutory provisions, and reservation cannot apply to single posts.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that reservation can be applied subject-wise to the post of Professor in the University, and the need to follow the roster issued by the State Gove....
Point of law: Reservation of post - reservation has to be subject-wise - a case cannot be referred to a larger Bench on mere asking of a party. A decision by two Judges has a binding effect on anothe....
The continuous advertisement of a reserved post for a specified period without a response from reserved category candidates entitles the appointed candidate to de-reservation and service benefits as ....
The main legal point established is that the amendments to the University Statutes, allowing the grouping of teaching posts as separate cadres for applying reservation principles, were constitutional....
Rule 17A indicates that under this Rule special recruitment can be done from among Scheduled Castes and Schedule Tribes when they are not adequately represented in any service, class, category or gra....
The warning given to the petitioner had been condoned by his promotion to the post of Professor, and therefore, non-consideration of his case for appointment as interim Dean or regular Dean cannot su....
Reservation in employment under Article 16(4) of the Constitution requires plurality of posts; a solitary post cannot be reserved, as it violates the constitutional bar against 100% reservation.
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.