Kerala High Court
Dr. Hamza V.K vs Aligarh Muslim University on 16 December, 2015
Author: A. Muhamed Mustaque
Bench: A.Muhamed Mustaque
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE
THURSDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST 2018 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1940
WP(C).No. 6709 of 2017(K)
PETITIONER(S):
DR. HAMZA V.K
S/O. ABOOBACKER(LATE)
VATTAMKANDATHIL HOUSE,
CHUNDAMBATTA POST,
PALAKKAD PIN-679337.
BY ADVS. SRI.KALEESWARAM RAJ
KUM.A.ARUNA
SRI.VARUN C.VIJAY
RESPONDENT(S):
1. ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR ALIGARH MUSLIM
UNIVERSITY,ALIGARH, U.P-202002.
2. THE REGISTRAR
ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY,
ALIGARH, U.P-202002.
3. THE VICE CHANCELLOR
ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY,
ALIGARH, U.P-202002.
4. THE DIRECTOR
ALIGARH MUSLIM UNIVERSITY,
MALAPPURAM CENTRE, CHERUKARA POST,
CHELAMALA, PERINTHALMANNA.
MALAPPURAM PIN-679340.
BY SMT.SANJEETHA K.A., SC
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02-08-2018,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
RVS.
WP(C).No. 6709 of 2017 (K)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 16.12.2015
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE APPROXIMATE COPY OF THE
APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE IN MASTER OF
BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION ISSUED TO THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE IN DOCTOR OF
PHILOSOPHY.
EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICE MEMO DATED 11.4.2011.
EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE FORM OF THE POST OF ASSOCIATE
PROFESSOR OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28.4.2016.
EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF THE TABLE PREPARED BY THE GENERAL
SELECTION COMMITTEE.
EXHIBIT P9: TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF THE AGE
QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE PREPARED ON THE
BASIS OF INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE
APPLICATION FORMS.
EXHIBIT P10; TRUE COPY OF THE GENERAL SELECTION COMMITTEE
REPORT DATED 12.5.2016.
EXHIBIT P11: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.10.2016
EXHIBIT 12: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE
ADVERTISEMENT NO.1/17 DATED 18.2.2017.
EXHIBIT P13: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OFFERING APPOINTMENT
TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P14; TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 3.4.2010.
EXHIBIT P15: TRUE COPY OF THE JRF AWARD LETTER.
EXHIBIT P16: TRUE COPY OF THE UGC REGULATIONS ON MINIMUM
QUALIFICATIONS FOR APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS AND OTHER
ACADEMIC STAFF IN UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES AND
MEASURES FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF STANDARD IN HIGHER
EDUCATION 2010.
EXHIBIT P17: TRUE COPY OF THE RTI APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P18: TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 05/07/2017.
WP(C).No. 6709 of 2017 (K)
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT R2(A): TRUE COPY OF THE LIST SHOWING THE DETAILS OF THE
CANDIDATES SHORT LISTED FOR INTERVIEW FOR MALAPPURAM
CENTRE.
EXHIBIT R2(B): TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE GENERAL SELECTION
COMMITTEE FOR MALAPPURAM CENTRE.
EXHIBIT R2(C): TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST BEFORE THE VICE CHANCELLOR ON
05/09/2016.
EXHIBIT R2(D): TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27/10/2016.
EXHIBIT R2(E): TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE.
EXHIBIT R2(F): TRUE COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE.
EXHIBIT R2(G): TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 03/05/2017.
/TRUE COPY/
P.S. TO JUDGE
RVS.
10/08/2018
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.
.........................................
W.P.(C).No.6709 of 2017
..........................................
Dated this the 2nd day of August, 2018.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, who is an applicant for the post of Associate Professor in Management Studies & Research, has come up before this Court challenging the decision of the University not to select any candidates among those who have applied for the above post.
2. The University notified the vacancies as per Ext.P1. Ext.P1 stipulates minimum 5 years experience in teaching/research industry. This is against the UGC regulations wherein it is stipulated that such experience is at least for minimum eight years.
3. Anyhow, the petitioner has no experience. Though the petitioner was interviewed by the Selection Board, this Court cannot direct the University to consider the petitioner's claim based on interview for the simple reason that the petitioner is not qualified. In fact, the notification itself is not in accordance with the UGC regulations. Such being the situation, this Court is of the view that no relief can be granted to the petitioner. However, it is submitted by learned standing counsel for the University that among the applicants, no one was selected and appointed. That submission is recorded. In such circumstances, it is open for the University to make fresh application in accordance with the UGC W.P.(C.) No. 6709 of 2017 2 regulations.
With the observations, the writ petition is disposed of declining all the reliefs.
Sd/-
A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, JUDGE.
cl