Telangana High Court
R.Roopa vs The State Of Telangana on 7 March, 2024
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO
W.P.Nos.8981, 8841, 8871, 8992, 9003, 9009, 9122,
9153, 9170 AND 9258 OF 2019
COMMON ORDER:
All these writ petitions are being disposed of by way of this common order, since the issue raised in all these writ petitions is one and the same.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd Respondent/ University.
3. For convenience, the facts in W.P.No.8981 of 2019 are being discussed hereunder:
This Writ Petition is filed seeking the following relief:
"to declare the show-cause notices 45,58,59,63 MUG/NLG/2019-20 dated 16.04.2019 issued by the 3rd respondent calling for the explanation of the petitioners "as to why the petitioners appointment as Associate Professor and Assistant Professors made as per Notification No.1/2011 dated.15.09.2011 should 2 not be annulled", as illegal, arbitrary, unjust and violative of article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and consequently set aside the Show Cause Notices by directing the respondents to continue the petitioners in their respective positions with salary and with all consequential benefits..."
4. The brief facts of the case are as under:-
The 3rd respondent/University issued Notification No.1 of 2011 dated 15.09.2011 for the recruitment of Professors, Associate Professors, Assistant Professors and Non-teaching staff for the University. The petitioners had applied for the posts of Assistant Professors for various subjects, and as per their qualifications, the University conducted interviews and on the recommendation of the Selection Committees, and in accordance with the approval of the Monitoring and Development Committee at its 33rd meeting held on 12.10.2012, the Vice Chancellor accorded permission for the appointments of the petitioners. As per the Statutory Rules and Regulations and the UGC Norms, the petitioners were selected to their respective posts and 3 appointment orders were given under NO.779/Estt/MGU/Nlg/2012-13, on various dates. The petitioners, since then, have been in service.
(i) The petitioners were selected along with five Associate Professors and twenty three Assistant Professors in various departments pursuant to Notification No. 1 of 2011 dated 15.09.2011, from March 2012 to November 2012. The petitioners successfully completed the probation period of two years and pursuant to the orders of this Court in W.P.Nos.6855, 6930, 6949 and 6999 of 2016, the 3rd Respondent declared their probation vide Lr.No.762/MGU/NLG/2016-17 dated 24.10.2016, thereby regularized their services. The petitioners were informed that the probation commencement is ordered without any prejudice to, and subject to the outcome of any pending Writ Petitions before this Court, and the orders were approved by the Executive Council and Vice-Chancellor.
(ii). When things stood thus, some of the unsuccessful candidates filed W.P.No.22180 of 2014 before this Court claiming that there were irregularities committed in the 4 recruitment process and thus, Notification No. 1 of 2011 dated 15.09.2011 has to be annulled. When the said Writ Petition was pending before this Court, the petitioners therein complained to the Government against the then Registrar, Vice-Chancellor, 6 Associate Professors and 26 Assistant Professors alleging certain irregularities in the selection and the recruitment process which took place vide the said Notification. Basing on the said complaint, the 1st Respondent had sent a letter to the 2nd Respondent to constitute an Enquiry Committee to take action on the same. Consequently, the 2nd Respondent appointed a three-member committee and the said committee submitted its report, which was placed before the Executive Council (Apex Body) of the University on 10.09.2018. Thereafter, the Executive Council resolved to serve notices on all the teachers appointed vide Notification No.1 of 2011 dated 15.09.2011. Accordingly, the Registrar issued the impugned show-cause notices dated 16.04.2019 to the petitioners as to why their appointments as Assistant Professors should not be annulled. The 5 petitioners gave their detailed explanation to the said notices on 22.04.2019.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that as per the contents of the impugned show-cause notices, no charges have been attributed to the petitioners. The said irregularities which are mentioned in the show-cause notices do not apply to the petitioners. The 3rd Respondent/University referred to Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, 13 and 19 of A.P. Universities Act, which are not attracted to the petitioners and those findings are not in accordance with the Act.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioners further contended that W.P.No.22180 of 2014 was filed before this Court by the unsuccessful candidates, claiming that there were irregularities committed in the recruitment process and thus, Notification No.1 of 2011 dated 15.09.2011 has to be annulled. The University had filed its counter through its then Registrar, stating that the appointments were made purely in accordance with the statutes, ordinances, rules and regulations of the University and in accordance with 6 the stipulated provisions of the Universities Act, 1991 and so, there could be no chance of committing irregularities by the recruiting authorities.
7. Today, when the matter is taken up for hearing, learned counsel for the respective parties informed this Court that W.P.No.22180 of 2014 filed by the unsuccessful candidates, was withdrawn on 01.08.2022 and the same was confirmed by the learned Standing Counsel for the 3rd Respondent/University. In the common counter filed by the 3rd Respondent/University, it was stated that in the report of the Enquiry Committee which was placed before the Executive Council of the University on 10.09.2018, the Enquiry Committee had pointed out the procedural irregularities pertaining to the Selection Committee, and had provided material to frame charges against the Selection Committee only, and not the selected candidates.
8. In view of the above submissions made by the learned counsel for respective parties, this Court is of the considered view that the main W.P.No.22180 of 2014 was withdrawn on 01.08.2022 by petitioners therein, which 7 was filed challenging the irregularities committed in the recruitment process and thus, the Notification No. 1 of 2011, dated 15.09.2011 has to be annulled. In those set of circumstances, there is no point to be considered in respect of the impugned show-cause notices dated 16.04.2019. Thus, without going into the merits of these cases, this Court is inclined to allow all the Writ Petitions by setting aside the impugned show-cause notices dated 16.04.2019 issued by the respondent/University.
9. Accordingly, all these Writ Petitions are allowed. No costs.
Pending miscellaneous petitions, if any, shall stand closed.
_____________________________________ NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO, J Date: 07.03.2024 BDR