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

2026 Supreme(Online)(Pat) 2954

PATNA HIGH COURT
MR. HARISH KUMAR, J
Hemnt Kumar – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar – Respondent
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.8586 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Md. Kamaluddin, Adv., Ms. Priya, Adv., Mr. Md. Gul Khan, Adv.
For the Respondents: Mr. Vivek Prasad, GP-07, Mr. Sanjay Kumar, AC to GP-7, Ms. Roona, AC to GP-7
For the University: Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh, Adv.
For the Chancellor: Mr. Amish Kumar, Adv., Mr. Krishna Chandra Jha, Adv., Mr. Satish Kumar Mehta, Adv.
For the Resp. No. 12: Mr. Shrinandan Prasad Singh, Sr. Adv., Mr. Kumar Sameer, Adv.
For the BSUSC: Mr. Tuhin Shankar, Adv.

Eligibility for appointment to academic positions requires adherence to prescribed qualifications, including Ph.D. where applicable.

Headnote:The petitioner challenged the resolution of the Managing Committee regarding the appointment of an In-charge Principal not possessing a Ph.D. degree, citing seniority and a prior ruling on eligibility. The respondent contended the lack of Ph.D. necessity and the petitioner's non-participation in the appointment process. The court directed the University Registrar to re-evaluate eligibility per relevant statutes and previous rulings, concluding with a ten-week timeline for resolution.

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH KUMAR ORAL ORDER

2 03-02-2026 Heard the parties.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction from this Court to declare the resolution no. ‘Gha’ dated 26.02.2024 taken by Managing Committee of the Wazirganj Mahavidyalay, Wazirganj, Gaya by which the respondent no. 12 has been declared suitable Assistant Professor to function as In-charge Principal of the said college is wholly illegal and unsustainable, besides the fact the petitioner no. 12 has been appointed by ignoring the claim of the petitioner.

3. Learned Advocate for the petitioner submitted that the respondent no. 12 has been appointed as an In-charge Principal, despite the fact he does not possess Ph.D degree, besides ignoring the claim of the petitioner that he is senior to the respondent no. 12. Reliance has also been placed on a decision rendered by learned Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 774 of 2024, wherein the Court has been pleased to hold that Ph.D eligibility is necessary to occupy the post of Assistant Professor, as such also for the post of In-charge Principal of the college.

4. Mr. Shrinandan Prasad Singh, learned Senior Advocate refuting the aforesaid contention submits at the Bar that there is no specific prescription to possess the Ph.D degree for the purposes of holding the post of In-charge Principal. So far the claim of the petitioner regarding his seniority, the same is not correct as it is the respondent no. 2 who joined on the post of lecturer prior to the petitioner. Moreover, the petitioner had neither participated and applied even for being made In-charge Principal, nor he appeared before the Committee for interview, hence there is no question of assignment as In-charge Principal in college.

5. Learned Advocate for the University apprised this Court that the order of the Managing Committee appointing the respondent no. 12 as In-charge Principal of the college has approved by the Registrar of the University vide letter no. 258 dated 12.04.2025 and since then he has been discharging his duty.

6. Having considered the submissions advanced by learned Advocate for the respective parties and taking note of the nature of the dispute regarding qualification for appointment for assignment to the post of In-charge Principal of the college, this Court deems it fit and proper to relegate the matter before the Registrar of the Magadh University, who shall look into the matter and take an appropriate decision with regard to the eligibility of the respondent no. 12 to hold the post of In-charge Principal of the college in question, keeping in mind the relevant statutes/notification issued by the University as well as the order passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 774 of 2024.

7. The entire exercise must be completed within a period of ten weeks’ from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order.

8. The writ petition stands disposed off.

(Harish Kumar, J)

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
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top