IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision: 15.01.2025 RAJESH KUMAR ......Petitioner VERSUS CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER .......Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD S. BHARDWAJ *****

Present: - Mr. Rohit Mittal, Advocate alongwith Petitioner-in-person.

Mr. Puneet Gupta, Advocate for respondents No.1 and 2.

*****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking quashing of the advertisement dated 16.02.2024 issued by the respondents-Central University of Haryana inviting applications for appointment to the post of the Assistant Professor (English).

2. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contends that the petitioner possesses the qualification of M.A. (English), B.Ed, M.Phil (English), UGC/NET (English), Ph.D. (English) and has to his credit-5 published International Research Papers establishing his academic excellence in English Literature. He further contends that the petitioner belongs to the Saini Community, which is recognized as “Other Backward Class (OBC)” in the State of Haryana. It is submitted that the respondent- University had issued an advertisement No.03/2012 dated 31.10.2012 for filling up various faculty positions including four (04) posts of Assistant Professor in the Department of English, by way of direct recruitment. Two of the said posts were reserved for the OBC category. Since the petitioner fulfilled the eligibility conditions prescribed for the post of Assistant Professor, he applied for the same. As per the final result declared by the respondents on 31.12.2013, the petitioner was second in the waiting list (i.e. at running serial No. 4) in the said recruitment process. The three candidates above the petitioner were Miss Rinu, Mr. Manoj Kumar and Mr. Umesh Kumar. He contends that although Rinu and Manoj Kumar were issued appointment letters, however, Manoj Kumar was ineligible as he did not possess Ph.D. degree as per the UGC Regulations, 2009 at the relevant time and also did not hold NET qualification and his candidature was required to be rejected. The petitioner hence filed CWP-16894 of 2016 before this Court challenging the appointment of Manoj Kumar. A Committee headed by Dr. S.N. Singh was constituted by the respondent-University to enquire into the allegations leveled by the petitioner. Vide its enquiry report dated 08.10.2018, the said Committee submitted its report recording a finding that Manoj Kumar was ineligible for the said post.

3. On consideration of the report of the Committee, the Executive Council of the respondent-University, in its 39^th meeting resolved that the same be accepted and in compliance of the orders dated 13.09.2018 of this Court, the report be submitted to the High Court on 31/10/2018. The said information was accordingly furnished before this Court whereupon the above CWP-16894 of 2016 was disposed of vide order dated 24.01.2019 permitting the University to take an appropriate decision in accordance with law in view of the enquiry report.

4. Accordingly, services of Manoj Kumar were terminated by the respondent University vide its order dated 21.02.2019. The above said order of termination however was a subject matter of challenge in CWP-5313 of 2019 preferred by Manoj Kumar before this Court on the ground that no show cause notice was served upon him and no opportunity of hearing was afforded before the order of dismissal was passed. The above said writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 27.02.2019 by setting aside the termination order and granting liberty to the respondent-University to pass a fresh order, in accordance with law, and after granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

5. In compliance thereto, the respondent-University constituted a four members sub Committee of the Executive Council to examine the submissions of Manoj Kumar and to give him personal hearing. Manoj Kumar, however, filed CWP-11380 of 2019 before this Court challenging