In public employment, where a uniform selection process is conducted for regular posts, the arbitrary and unexplained classification of a qualified candidate for a contractual appointment, while others are granted regular status, constitutes discriminatory treatment in violation of constitutional guarantees of equality.

S.V.N. BHATTI, J.

1. In January 2013, Respondent No. 2/Institute issued an Advertisement numbered FS-01/2013 (“Advertisement”) calling for applications from suitable candidates for the posts of Professor, Associate Professor and Assistant Professor. The Civil Appeal concerns the appointment of an Assistant Professor. The Advertisement invites applications for appointment to regular posts of Assistant Professor, and the Appellant is among the applicants. The qualifications required for the post and the qualifications possessed by the Appellant are stated in the following table:

M.S. in Cyber Law & Information Security, IIIT-

First class or equivalent at the degree Allahabad, First Division; awarded Bronze preceding the Ph.D. in the appropriate Medal and Certificate of Merit for branch securing Third Position in the MS batch;

CGPA 9.02/10 (July 2006 – May 2008) Working as Lecturer at Ewing Christian Experience of minimum 3 years of teaching College (University of Allahabad), Department of / research / industrial experience as on Computer Science, 21.07.2008 to 05.04.2013;

the closing date of the advertisement, additionally served as Guest Faculty at IIIT-

25.02.2013 Allahabad from October 2012 to 05.04.2013 Faculty positions in areas including Information Technology (including Applied for Assistant Professor in Information Security, Laws & Practices, the Information Security/MSCLIS Information and Network Security), stream (Information Security Laws & Practices;

Electronics, Management, MSc/LIS, Information and Network Security)

Bioinformatics, Biomedical Engineering

2. The Appellant was invited for the interview held on 18.03.2013. On 06.04.2013, Respondent No. 3 issued a letter of appointment to the Appellant as Assistant Professor on a contract basis for a period of 12 months. The Appellant accepted the appointment on a contract basis, and continued to discharge the duties and functions in the Respondent No. 2/Institute. On 26.03.2014, Respondent No. 2, on a few perceived omissions in the selection process, cancelled all the appointments made pursuant to the recommendation of the Selection Committee dated 06.04.2013. It is pertinent to note that, in the very selection dated 06.04.2013, Respondent No. 2 appointed thirteen individuals as Associate and Assistant Professors in the Institute. The Appellant and another individual, Dr. Ranjana Vyas, were recommended on a contract basis and given appointments. The aggrieved appointees, pursuant to the recommendation of the Selection Committee dated 06.04.2013, challenged the cancellation of appointment by Respondent No. 2 by filing Writ Petition No. 22558 of 2014 in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.

3. On 11.12.2015, the Writ Petitions filed by the removed Associate and Assistant Professors were allowed, and Respondent No. 2 was directed to reconsider the issue after affording the candidates an opportunity. The Appellant filed an application for modification on the ground that the Appellant’s initial appointment on a contractual basis was ex facie illegal and contrary to the Rules. The Appellant’s application was disposed of on 24.03.2017, along with the Civil Appeal Nos. 4406-4418 of 2017 filed against the judgment dated 11.12.2015 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad. 4. The present Civil Appeal arises from the decision taken by Respondent No. 2, pursuant to the order of remand.

5. Respondent No. 2, while reconsidering the matter, decided to reiterate the decision of the Selection Committee,