Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Madhya Pradesh High Court

Dr.Gautam vs Principal Secretary The State Of Madhya ... on 22 August, 2019

Author: Vivek Rusia

Bench: Vivek Rusia

              THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                         W.P. No. 6594/2010
           Dr. Gautam Jain Sasmal V/s. State of M.P. & another.
                                                               1
Indore, dated : 22.08.2019
                Petitioner by Shri Umesh Gajankush, Advocate.
                Respondent/State by Shri Arvind Sharma, Govt.
Advocate General.
                With consent of learned counsel for the parties, heard
finally.
                                                  ORDER

The petitioner has filed the present petition being aggrieved by one of the conditions of advertisement dated 26.3.2010 issued by respondent No.2 for appointment to the post of Professor and Reader in various Govt. Autonomous Ayurvedic Colleges at Bhopal, Burhanpur, Gwalior, Indore, Jabalpur, Rewa and Ujjain.

2. The petitioner being Post Graduation in "Rog Nidan" in the System of Ayurved and having teaching experience as a Lecturer, Assistant Professor and Professor in different colleges and applied for the post of Professor under the aforesaid advertisement. As per condition No.1 of the advertisement, all the candidates must have essential qualification as per the norms fixed by Central Council of Indian Medicine (CCIM). The condition No. 16 of the advertisement requires that attested copy of certificate of experience produced by the candidate for counting total period of experience would be acceptable only if the appointment was made as per College Code

28. Condition No.16 of the advertisement is reproduced below :

"16. vuqHko ------------------------------ fo"k; esa ------------------------------------ in ij -------------------------------------- o"kZ -----------------------------------ekg

---------------------------------------- fnu ------------------------------------------- dk v/;kiu vuqHko gSA ¼izek.k i= dh vfHkizekf.kr izfr layXu djsa] vuqHko dh x.kuk 'kkldh; lsok vof/k@fo-fo- dksM 28 ds varxZr p;u ds vuqlkj gh ekU; gksxh½"

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH W.P. No. 6594/2010 Dr. Gautam Jain Sasmal V/s. State of M.P. & another.

3. The grievance of the petitioner is that she is having qualification and experience as per CCIM norms and she is not aware as to whether College Code 28 was followed in her appointment by various Colleges. According to the petitioner, since she fulfils the qualification prescribed by CCIM, therefore, requirement and applicability of College Code 28 by respondent No.2 is arbitrary. In the CCIM norms, as per Annexure P/4, there is no condition of fulfilment of College Code 28. As per qualification and experience prescribed under the Regulations for appointment of teaching staff in Ayurved College applicable w.e.f. 1.7.1989. For the post of Professor, total experience of 10 years in the Subject is necessary and out of which, there should be 5 years' teaching experience as a Reader. In the aforesaid Regulation, there is no requirement of fulfilment of College Code 28. Hence, the candidature of petitioner is liable to be accepted.

4. After notice, respondents have filed the return by submitting that CCIM has reviewed its policy for appointment and promotion to the post of Lecturer, Assistant Professor and Professor w.e.f. 3.6.2008, in which, as per Clause 13, the constitution of selection committee should have at least one representative from the affiliating University. The aforesaid condition is as per College Code 28 in the State of M.P. At the time of issuance of the advertisement in question, the amended policy dated 8.8.2008 was in force, therefore, such condition has rightly been imposed in the advertisement. The certificate submitted by the candidates are required to be verified or the certificate should be attested by the THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH W.P. No. 6594/2010 Dr. Gautam Jain Sasmal V/s. State of M.P. & another.

issuing authority in respect of compliance of College Code 28. There is no arbitrariness in the condition of advertisement, it is there to ensure that the selection of the candidates in the colleges whether private or Government as a teacher was in accordance with rules and regulations.

5. I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the material available on the record.

6. In pursuant to the advertisement, the petitioner applied for the post of Professor and submitted the experience certificate dated 13.8.2009 issued by the Principal of the various Colleges. All the Colleges are situated in the State of Karnataka except one college - Shubhdeep Ayurved Medical College & Hospital, Indore. Since the advertisement has been issued in the State of M.P. by the Commissioner, Indian System of Medicine & Homeopathy, therefore, respondent No.2 has insisted for compliance of College Code 28. As per Clause 13 of the amended regulation, constitution of selection committee must have at least one representative from the affiliating University. Since the Government Ayurved Colleges are situated in M.P. and affiliated to the various Universities, hence College Code 28 is made applicable in the advertisement. For any appointment in the Colleges affiliated with the University, compliance of College Code 28 is necessary. CCIM Regulations only require working experience as a Professor, Reader, Lecturer appointed in the College. Therefore, all the appointments are required to be made as per College Code 28. Even if this condition is not there in the earlier circulars applicable w.e.f. 1.7.1989, but being the condition in College Code it is applicable to all THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH W.P. No. 6594/2010 Dr. Gautam Jain Sasmal V/s. State of M.P. & another.

appointments made in the Colleges affiliated to Unversity. In the amended circular of CCIM has only clarifies that constitution of selection committee must have at least one representative from the affiliating University. Therefore, this condition No.13 in the advertisement in question is not arbitrary and it is in accordance with College Code 28.

7. So far as contention of the petitioner is concerned that he cannot obtain the certificate to the effect that whether in her selection, member of affiliating University was there or not, it is for the authority who is issuing the certificate to certify that the appointment of the candidate is made as per rules and regulations and College Code of University. The candidate is required to submit the attested copy of the certificate issued.

8. Consequently, this petition fails and is hereby dismissed.

No order as to costs.

( VIVEK RUSIA ) JUDGE Alok/-

Date: 2019.08.27 16:46:44 +05'30'