The court affirmed that the Writ Petition's prayers have become infructuous due to subsequent appointments confirmed by higher courts, highlighting the importance of candidate qualifications in academic appointments.

J U D G M E N T

The Writ Petition is filed seeking the following reliefs;

“To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondents to restrain themselves from the wrongfully proceeding under Exhibit P1 to consider candidates qualified in other subjects other than Gandhian Studies and Development Studies from being appointed as Assistant Professor in the school of Gandhian Studies and Development Studies.

II. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or to direct the Respondents to consider Exhibit P5 representation on merits with in a time frame.

III. To grant such other relief's that may be deemed fit and proper by this Hon'ble Court in the circumstance of the case and also to allow the Petitioners to realize the cost of the proceedings from Respondents.”

2. The petitioner challenged Ext.P1 notification issued by the

2nd respondent University dated 28.04.2018, wherein applications were invited for appointment of faculties to various departments including 3 posts of Assistant Professor in the School of Gandhian Thoughts and Development studies. The petitioner sought to restrain the respondents from proceeding with Ext.P1 notification.

3. This Court had passed an interim order dated 23.07.2018, as follows;

“The University is directed to file a statement within one week. The University is free to complete the interview and selection process for selecting the Assistant Professor in the vacancy of the School of Gandhian Thoughts and Development Studies. However, no appointment shall be made without prior orders from this Court. If the candidates are selected in the meanwhile, the University shall furnish the details of such candidates.”

4. When the matter was taken up on 14.01.2025, the learned Standing Counsel for the University was directed to file a statement in compliance with the order dated 23.07.2018. Accordingly, the 2nd respondent stated that the petitioner was also an applicant to the post of Assistant Professor pursuant to Ext P1 notification and had participated in the selection process.

5. Interview was conducted for the post of Assistant Professor (OC-1, E/B/T-1, Viswakarma-1) in the School of Gandhian Thought and Development Studies from 24/09/2019 to 27/09/2019. The rank list was published vide U.O No. 4743/AD A2/2019/MGU dated 05/10/2019 and accordingly appointment letter was issued to Dr. Rekha Raj, Dr. Abhilash G Nath, Dr.Rajesh M. in turn OC, Viswakarma and Ezhava respectively and all of them joined duty on

09.10.2019.

6. The appointment of Dr Rekha Raj was challenged before this Hon'ble Court by Dr Nisha Velappan Nair in W.P.(c) 1861/2020. The Writ Petition was dismissed. However, in the Writ Appeals filed, as WA No. 957/2022 and WA 1071/2022 , the judgment of the learned Single Judge was set aside through a judgment dated 25.08.2022, quashing the selection of Dr. Rekha Raj and directing the University to appoint the Dr. Nisha Velappan Nair. The judgment of the Hon'ble Division Bench was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in SLP No. 16510/2022 vide order dated 23/09/2022. It is stated that the university had thus issued orders appointing Dr Nisha Vellapan Nair on 13.10.2022. The statements made above are recorded.

Given the above statements and the subsequent events mentioned therein, the prayers in this Writ Petition have become infructuous and the same is closed, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge in case a cause of action arises.

SD/-

MOHAMMED NIAS C.P., JUDGE JJ APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21090/2018 PETITIONER EXHIBITS THE TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION NO.AD.AII(1)/5008/ADMN.(4)2017 DATED EXHIBIT P1:

28/04/2018 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT THE TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED EXHIBIT P2: 30/11/2012 THE TRUE COPY OF