Gauhati High Court
Vinay Singh vs National Institute Of Technology ... on 19 February, 2021
Author: Sudhanshu Dhulia
Bench: Sudhanshu Dhulia, Manash Ranjan Pathak
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010015672021
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : WA/32/2021
VINAY SINGH
S/O- MAHENDRA SINGH, R/O- H/NO. - Y-IIA-19A, CHALTIANG DINGDI
VENG, AIZAWL, PIN- 796012, MIZORAM.
VERSUS
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MIZORAM (NIT MIZORAM) AND
ANR
REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR, CHALTIANG DAWRKAWN, AIZAWL-
796012, MIZORAM,
2:THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF NIT MIZORAM
REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN
CHALTLANG DAWRKAWN
AIZAWL
MIZORAM
PIN- 796012
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. P D NAIR
Advocate for the Respondent :
Page No.# 2/3 BEFORE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. SUDHANSHU DHULIA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANASH RANJAN PATHAK 19.02.2021 (Sudhanshu Dhulia, C.J.) Heard Mr. G Alam, learned counsel for the appellant and Mr. L Sailo, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. This writ appeal has been filed by the appellant against the order dated 19.08.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP(C) 64/2019 by which the writ petition was dismissed.
3. The appellant/writ petitioner is an Assistant Professor in Mathematics in National Institute of Technology, Mizoram. When the post of Associate Professor (Mathematics) was advertised by the department, the petitioner was one of the candidates. Inter alia, one of the essential qualifications for the post of Associate Professor was that a candidate must have put in at least 3 years of service as an Assistant Professor (Mathematics) on a grade pay of Rs.8,000/-. Evidently the petitioner does not have this qualification as he was given grade pay of Rs.8,000/- only on 25.07.2018 whereas the petitioner was competing for the post of Associate Professor in the year 2019. Admittedly, the petitioner did not have this qualification of 3 years of service as an Assistant Professor on a grade pay of Rs.8,000/-. The petitioner, therefore, was not considered eligible for the post. The petitioner filed writ petition being WP(C) 64/2019 challenging the action of the Institute and the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition as evidently the petitioner did not fulfill the mandatory qualification.
4. The admitted position herein is that the petitioner does not have the required qualification of 3 years of service as an Assistant Professor on a grade pay of Rs.8,000/- and this condition cannot be relaxed. The argument of the appellant that in some other institutes and at some other point of time, a relaxation has been made. This, however, is not a relevant consideration for this Court. We have not been shown under which provision of law a relaxation can be made. Evidently, the petitioner is not qualified for the post of Associate Page No.# 3/3 Professor (Mathematics) and therefore, his candidature has rightly been rejected.
5. There are absolutely no grounds for interference in this case. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant