Back
2018 Supreme(Tri) 93
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA AGARTALA
S. TALAPATRA, J.
Shri. Debashish Roy son of late Swadesh Ranjan Roy – Petitioner
Versus
Tripura Public Service Commission & Ors. – Respondents
WP(C) No. 496, 674 of 2015
Decided On : 03-04-2018
For the Petitioner: Mr. A. K. Bhowmik, Sr. Adv., Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, Adv., Ms. A. Banik, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. S. Chakraborty, Addl. G.A., Ms. A. S. Lodh, Addl. G.A., Mr. P. Datta, Adv., Mr. S. Bhattacharjee, Adv., Ms. P. Sen, Adv.
The recruitment to the post of Assistant Professor in IASE or CTE is governed by the NCTE guidelines published in the Gazette of India dated 01.12.2014, and not by the UGC regulation, 2010. The court held that the petitioners, having participated in the selection process, were estopped from questioning the methodology of selection. The court further noted that persons without the eligibility to be appointed cannot challenge the selection of candidates in other disciplines.
Headnote:
Selection - Assistant Professor - Education, Political Science - UGC Regulation, 2010, NCTE Guidelines - The court dismissed the writ petitions challenging the selection and appointment of Assistant Professors in Education and Political Science. The court held that the recruitment to the post of Assistant Professor in IASE or CTE is governed by the NCTE guidelines published in the Gazette of India dated 01.12.2014, and not by the UGC regulation, 2010. The court found that the discipline-wise merit list was prepared based on the performance in the interview, and there was no evidence of mala fide intention in the selection process. The court also held that the petitioners, having participated in the selection process, were estopped from questioning the methodology of selection. The court further noted that persons without the eligibility to be appointed cannot challenge the selection of candidates in other disciplines.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners challenged the selection and appointment of Assistant Professors in Education and Political Science, alleging that some candidates did not have the essential qualifications as per UGC regulation, 2010, and that the reservation policy was not applied subject-wise. The petitioners also raised objections regarding the method of selection and the preparation of the merit list.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the recruitment to the post of Assistant Professor in IASE or CTE is governed by the NCTE guidelines published in the Gazette of India dated 01.12.2014, and not by the UGC regulation, 2010. The court dismissed the writ petitions, stating that the discipline-wise merit list was prepared based on the performance in the interview, and there was no evidence of mala fide intention in the selection process. The court also held that the petitioners, having participated in the selection process, were estopped from questioning the methodology of selection. The court further noted that persons without the eligibility to be appointed cannot challenge the selection of candidates in other disciplines.
Issues: Challenging the selection and appointment of Assistant Professors in Education and Political Science, alleging lack of essential qualifications, non-application of reservation policy subject-wise, and irregularities in the method of selection and preparation of the merit list.
Ratio Decidendi: The recruitment to the post of Assistant Professor in IASE or CTE is governed by the NCTE guidelines published in the Gazette of India dated 01.12.2014, and not by the UGC regulation, 2010. The court dismissed the writ petitions, stating that the discipline-wise merit list was prepared based on the performance in the interview, and there was no evidence of mala fide intention in the selection process. The court also held that the petitioners, having participated in the selection process, were estopped from questioning the methodology of selection. The court further noted that persons without the eligibility to be appointed cannot challenge the selection of candidates in other disciplines.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the writ petitions challenging the selection and appointment of Assistant Professors in Education and Political Science, finding no grounds to interfere with the selection process or the recommendation made by the TPSC.
These writ petitions being WP(C) No. 496 of 2015 [Debashish Roy vs. Tripura Public Service Commission and Ors.] and WP(C) No. 674 of 2015 [Shri Chandan Kumar Paul vs. Tripura Public Service Commission and Ors.] are combined for obvious reason that the question that has been raised in those writ petitions are common and identical notwithstanding that the selection in respect of the subject is different. In WP(C) No. 496 of 2015, the selection in the post of Assistant Professor in Education in the Institute of Advance Studies in Education (IASE in short)/College of Teachers Education (CTE) under the Education (Higher) Department, Govt. of Tripura has been challenged, whereas in the writ petition being WP(C) No. 674 of 2015, the selection in the post of Assistant Professor in Education in the Institute of Advance Studies Education in Political Science (IASE in short)/College of Teachers Education (CTE) under the Education (Higher) Department, Govt. of Tripura has been challenged. Consequently, the selection and appointment of the private respondents viz the respondents No. 5 to 25 in both the writ petitions have been called in question by the writ petitioners. Since a common question wades through these writ petitions, it would be apposite to decide them by a common judgment, however, having due regard to the variation of facts.
2. Before we dwelled upon, the common question those raised in the writ petitions the minimal facts those would be required to have the perspective fact may be introduced at the outset.
WP(C) No. 496 of 2015 [ Debasish Ray vs. Tripura Public Service Commission and Ors.]
3. The petitioner in this writ petition has been serving as the Post Graduate Teacher under the Govt. of Tripura and he has completed Masters of Arts in English and Masters of Arts in Education. He has also completed the Bachelor of Education. The petitioner has as well cleared the State Level Eligibility Test (SLET) conducted by the SLET Commission in the year 2011 and the National Eligibility Test (NET) conducted by the UGC in the year 2012 in Education. These facts are not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that the respondent No. 1, the TPSC issued the advertisement No. 1-2015 (Annexure-2 to the writ petition) inviting application from the eligible candidates for the post of Assistant Professor for IASE/CTE. In the advertisement it has been clearly provided as under:
“Subject wise vacancy for direct recruitment to the post of Assistant Professor (Group-A Gazetted), Institute of Advanced Studies in Education (IASE)/College of Teachers Education (CTE) is mentioned below:
Sl. No.
Subject
No. of Post
Sl. No.
Subject
No. of post
1.
Psychology
02
8.
Political Science
01
2.
Economics
02
9.
History
01
3.
Bengali
03
10
Mathematics
01
4.
English
03
11
Physics
01
5.
Chemistry
02
12
Life Science
01
6.
Education
06
13
Geography
01
7.
Sanskrit
02
14
Commerce
01
Educational & Other qualification: Essential:
(i) A Master’s Degree in Science/Humanities/Arts with 50% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever grading system is followed) from a recognized University.
(ii) M.Ed. with at least 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever grading system is followed) from a recognized University.
(iii) Any other stipulation prescribed by the UGC/Any such affiliation body/State Govt. from time to time for the positions of Principal and Lectures, shall be mandatory.
Or
(i) M. A. in Education with 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever grading system is followed ) from a recognized University.
(ii) B. Ed. With at least 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever grading system is followed) from a recognized University and
(iii) Any other stipulation prescribed by the UGC/Any such affiliation
