SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Online)(KER) 59110

HIGH COURT OF KERALA
A. Muhamed Mustaque, J
DR.BEENA JAMES – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(C)/34156/2018



Advocates:
SRI.BABY ISSAC ILLICKAL, SRI.ISAAC KURUVILLA ILLIKAL, SRI.THOMAS ABRAHAM, SC, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA

An unchallenged selection process mandates timely appointment approval by the University in absence of discrepancies.

Headnote:

Appointment - Assistant Professor - University Approval - Sections of Educational Regulations - The court upheld that the proposal for appointment of the petitioner should be approved by the University, given the absence of discrepancies in the selection process.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner was selected as an Assistant Professor in a college. The University refused to approve the appointment due to discrepancies noted in other candidates, despite no issues with the petitioner's selection.

Finding of the Court:

The court concluded that there were no anomalies in the petitioner's selection and directed the educational agency to forward the proposal for appointment approval promptly.

Issues: Whether the University could refuse to approve the appointment of the petitioner despite no issues regarding their selection.

Ratio Decidendi: The key ratio established is that when a selection process has no discrepancies, the University must approve the appointment without undue delay.

Final Decision: The writ petition was disposed of, directing the University to approve the petitioner’s appointment promptly.

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner was selected to be appointed as Assistant Professor in the Department of Chemistry in St.Michael's College, Mayithara in Cherthala. The college is an aided college. The petitioner stood first in the open merit quota.

2. The University noted certain discrepancy in awarding of marks to certain candidates. However, the University had not noted any defects in the proposal of the petitioner. Since the entire proposal was returned to the educational agency, the University is not in a position to approve the appointment of the petitioner.

Since there are no anomalies in regard to the petitioner's selection, the Corporate Agency shall forward the petitioner's proposal forthwith and thereupon the University shall approve the appointment without any delay. If the University approves the appointment, salary shall be disbursed to the petitioner without any delay. However, this will be subject to any enquiry to be conducted by the Department of Collegiate Education in regard to approval.

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE smp APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 PHOTOCOPY OF THE M.SC.CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P2 PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT.28/01/2002 OF THE COUNCIL OF SCIENTIFIC & INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH(CSIR).

EXHIBIT P3 PHOTOCOPY OF THE PH.D.CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER DT.22/05/2008.

EXHIBIT P4 PHOTOCOPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE DT.07/09/2010.

EXHIBIT P5 PHOTOCOPY OF THE SAID NOTIFICATION IN THE MALAYALA MANORAMA NEWSPAPER DT.18/12/2013.

EXHIBIT P6 PHOTOCOPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SELECTION COMMITTEE MEETING DT.12/02/2014.

EXHIBIT P7 PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPOINTMENT ORDER DT.09/06/2014 OF THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P8 PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROPOSAL FOR APPROVAL OF APPOINTMENT DT.23/07/2014.

EXHIBIT P9 PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DT.31/05/2017 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.

EXHIBIT P10 PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C).NO.25225/2017 DT.31/07/2017. EXHIBIT P10 (a) PHOTOCOPY OF THE G.O.

(P)NO.398/2010/H.EDN.DATED 17/12/2010. EXHIBIT P10 (b) PHOTOCOPY OF THE G.O(P)NO.392/2010/H.EDN.DATED 10/12/2010.

EXHIBIT P11 PHOTOCOPY OF THE RESUBMITTED PROPOSAL FOR APPROVAL DT.16/08/2017.

EXHIBIT P12 PHOTOCOPY OF THE SAID LETTER OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DT.30/08/2017.

EXHIBIT P13 PHOTOCOPY OF THE SAID UGC REGULATION 2009.

EXHIBIT P14 PHOTOCOPY OF THE SCORE SHEET OF THE CHEMISTRY.

EXHIBIT P15 PHOTOCOPY OF THE NORMS AND PROCEDURES FOR SELECTION OF TEACHERS FOR APPOINTMENT IN PRIVATE COLLEGES.

EXHIBIT P16 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT TO THE EXT.P8 ORDER PASSED BY THE

4TH RESPONDENT DT.16/08/2017.

EXHIBIT P17 PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE OFFICE MANUAL.

EXHIBIT P18 PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT.04/06/2016 FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.

EXHIBIT P18 (a) PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT.02/08/2018 FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.

EXHIBIT P18 (b) PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT.16/08/2018 FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.

EXHIBIT P19 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.05/10/2018.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.

True Copy

P.S to Judge

smp

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top