Page 1

JUDGMENT

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9866 OF 2013

(@ SLP (C) No. 35063 of 2009)

GANAPATH SINGH

GANGARAM SINGH RAJPUT

…

APPELLANT

Versus

GULBARGA UNIVERSITY REP.

BY ITS REGISTRAR & OTHERS

…

RESPONDENTS

WITH

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 9867 OF 2013

(@ SLP (C) No. 35173 of 2009)

GULBARGA UNIVERSITY REP.

BY ITS REGISTRAR & OTHERS

…

APPELLANTS

Versus

SHIVANAND & OTHERS

…

RESPONDENTS

J U D G M E N T

CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD, J.

Ganpath Singh Gangaram Singh Rajput as also the

Gulbarga University, aggrieved by the judgment and

order dated 19/24^th of November, 2009 of the Karnataka

High Court in Writ Appeal No. 3216 of 2004 quashing

the appointment of aforesaid Ganpath Singh Gangaram

Page 2

JUDGMENT

Singh Rajput as Lecturer in MCA in the Post-graduate

Department of the University, have preferred these

special leave petitions.

Leave granted.

Short facts giving rise to the present appeals

are as follows:

The appellant, Gulbarga University, hereinafter

referred to as ‘the University’, issued notification

dated May 22, 1998 inviting applications for

appointment to various posts including the post of

Lecturer in Masters’ in Computer Application, for

short, MCA.

The minimum qualification, for

appointment to the post of Lecturer and with which we

are concerned in these appeals, is good academic

record with at least 55% of marks or an equivalent

grade at the Masters’ Degree level in the relevant

subject from an Indian University or an equivalent

degree from a foreign University.

Shivanand, respondent no. 3 herein, and Ganpath

Singh Gangaram Singh Rajput, respondent no. 3 of the

2

Page 3

JUDGMENT

writ petition (appellant herein), besides other

persons offered their candidature for appointment to

the post of Lecturer in MCA. The appellant claims to

have passed the M.Sc. examination in Mathematics with

First Class with distinction. It is an admitted

position that Shivanand possessed a post-graduate

degree in MCA and was eligible in terms of the

advertisement. The University, in terms of Section

53 of the Karnataka Universities Act constituted a

‘Board of appointment’ for selecting suitable

candidates. It consisted of experts holding high

positions in academic field including a Professor

each from University of Pune, Bombay University and

Kuvempu University.

The Board of appointment

interviewed the candidates and ultimately made a

recommendation for the appointment of the appellant,

hereinafter referred to as ‘Ganpat’, who admittedly

did not have a post-graduate degree in MCA, but had a

Masters’ Degree in Mathematics. The recommendation

so made was placed for consideration before the

Syndicate which approved his appointment.

3

Page 4

JUDGMENT

Shivanand challenged the aforesaid selection and

appointment in a writ petition filed before the High

Court, inter alia, contending that Masters’ Degree in

Mathematics will not make Ganpat eligible in terms of

the advertisement and, therefore, his selection and

appointment to the post of Lecturer in MCA is

illegal. Shivanand further pointed out that since he

possessed a post-graduate degree in MCA and fulfils

all other conditions, he ought to have been selected

for appointment. Ganpat as also the University

resisted the prayer of Shivanand and contended that

the expression ‘relevant subject’ used in the

notification would mean any subject which is relevant

for the purpose of holding the post of Lecturer in

MCA. It was contended that Masters’ degree in

Mathematics is a degree in a relevant subject and

thus Ganpat possessed the basic qualification. While

defending the appointment it was further contended

that in the syllabus for MCA, Mathematics is the core

subject and, therefore, a candidate having a post-

graduate deg