Arya, J -- 1. This order shall govern disposal of batch of writ petitions, viz., W.P.Nos.19665, 19666, 19667, 19669 and 19763 of 2017. As similar controversy involved in all these writ petitions, they are heard heard analogously and disposed of by this common order.

Facts have been dealt with from W.P.No. 19665/2017 :

Taking exception to the advertisement dated 30.10.2017 issued by the respondent No.2, (National Project Implementation Unit, Government of India through its Secretary) inviting applications for 1221 posts of Assistant Professor in 53 colleges through the Centralized Engagement Process under the Technical Education Quality Improvement Project (for short, ‘the TEQIP III) spread over in different States as indicated in Annexure P-1, providing the educational qualification :

BE/BTech and ME/MTech in relevant branch with 1st Class (60% or 6.75 grade point) either in bachelors or Masters degree from a recognized institution/university (for equivalent UG/PG degree refer Annexure P-1) and should have qualified through GATE exam;

petitioner with Master of Technology degree working as temporary Assistant Professor with respondent No. 5; Ujjain Engineering College, Ujjain (for short, ‘the respondent No. 5) on clock hour basis and being paid on the basis of number of hours worked, has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India inter alia contending that; (i) the norms/educational qualifications prescribed by the University Grants Commission (for short, ‘the UGC’) and All India Council for Technical Education (for short, ‘AICTE’) do not contemplate passing/qualifying GATE exam as essential qualification for recruitment to the post of Assistant Professor; (ii) one set of ad hoc employees cannot be replaced by another set of ad hoc /contractual employees and (iii) the advertisement does not provide for reservation for various categories as per Roster system. (Emphasis supplied)

2. On notice, the respondents No. 1 and 2 have filed counteraffidavit opposing the admission of the writ petition. The respondent No. 3 has also filed counter-affidavit with the contention that no relief since has been sought against it, it is not necessary party. However, it has no objection if the recruiting agency, i.e., respondents No. 3 and 4 adopts higher standards and qualifications in addition to the minimum qualification notified by the respondent No. 3 as long as there is availability of the courses and applicants in the country, as the case may be. Respondent No. 4 in its separate counter-affidavit has also sought dismissal of the writ petition.

3. Respondents No. 1 and 2 inter alia contend that;

(i) petitioner is not in the regular employment of respondent No. 5 on the post of Assistant Professor. Therefore, no legal right vested on to him to claim any regular employment or seek protection of employment taking exception to the advertisement criticizing the prescription of educational qualifications and the eligibility conditions fixed thereunder;

(ii) TEQIP-III Project is sponsored by the World Bank and the Government of India. The Centralized Engagement Process has issued the advertisement for availing the services of the specialized teaching faculty under the aforesaid project and is in addition to the existing teaching faculty already engaged by the respondent No. 5 either on temporary basis or on sanctioned post. Therefore, the apprehension expressed by the petitioner in the instant writ petition that he is sought to be replaced by the selection process through advertisement issued by the respondent No. 2 is misconceived and misdirected, besides factually incorrect;

(iii) the Centralized Engagement of Teaching Faculty initiated by the respondent No. 2 is for and on behalf of respondent No. 5/institution to fulfill the faculty requirement of the institution for seeking Accreditation from National Board of Accreditation (Autonomus Body constituted by the Government of India); as upon accreditation, th