Madhya Pradesh High Court
Dr. Hari Singh Gour University vs Dr. Chandralata Singh on 15 May, 2024
Author: Vivek Agarwal
Bench: Vivek Agarwal
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
RP No. 423 of 2024
(DR. HARI SINGH GOUR UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS Vs DR. CHANDRALATA SINGH AND OTHERS)
Dated : 15-05-2024
Ms. Shobha Menon - Senior Advocate assisted by Shri Rahul Choubey
- Advocate for the petitioners.
Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal - Advocate for the respondents.
Let Regulations which deals with constitution of Screening Committee as provided in Ordinance-11 enclosed along with Review Petition as Annexure A-
2 be brought on record because the main thrust of arguments put forth by Smt. Shobha Menon, Senior Advocate is to the effect that firstly, there is no provision for calculating API for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor and it is only meant for Associate Professor and Professor. Secondly, it is submitted that, score granted by Screening Committee has no bearing on the Selection Committee and Selection Committee being totally different will not be impacted by the finding of the Screening Committee. Reference is also made to Annexure P-4 which in Clause 6.0.1 provides that over all selection procedure shall incorporate transparent, objective and credible methodology of analysis of merits and credentials of the applicants based on weightages given to the performance of the candidate in different relevant dimensions and his/her performance on scoring system proforma based on the Academic Performance Indicators (API) as provided in this Regulation in tables 1 to 11 of Appendix 3.
Ms. Shobha Menon pointing to Appendix 3 - II (c) submits that there is no provision for API and only minimum qualification as stipulated in the Regulations is to be seen for the post of Assistant Professor. Thereafter, Signature Not Verified Signed by: KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Signing time: 15-05-2024 19:19:50 2 Selection Committee comes into the scene and it is provided that Selection Committee will adjudge a candidate on the weightage of total 100 points, out of which 50% will be for: (a) academic record and research performance; (b) 30% for assessment of domain knowledge and teaching skills; and (c) interview performance 20%. Thus, it is submitted that Selection Committee being independent of Screening Committee has to give marks on the aforesaid three criteria independently and it cannot be assisted or guided by Screening Committee.
Reference is also made to Annexure REJ-2 filed by the petitioner along with the rejoinder and reading the last line of introduction, it is pointed out that final marks obtained by candidates will be used to rank them for shortlisting. Thus, it is submitted that the said criteria was meant only for shortlisting.
However, for the present to keep the record straight when complete part of this Annexure REJ -2 is read, then it titles as "suggestive guidelines to shortlist the applicants for interview for position of Assistant Professor in the University".
Introduction provides that applications submitted by candidates who do not satisfy minimum eligibility criteria as advertised, shall be rejected. NET/SLET is a prerequisite for appointment as Assistant Professor. However, exemption from NET/SLET shall be granted as per UGC norms. Marks will be allotted to each of otherwise eligible candidates using the guidelines. The final marks obtained by candidates will be used to rank them for shortlisting.
Thereafter, it is provided that how academic career is to be classified in three categories and then marks are to be allotted for each category. Then paragraph 3 deals with the marks for teaching experience, etc. and parameters Signature Not Verified for that how many marks are to be given for which level of teaching is Signed by: KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Signing time: 15-05-2024 19:19:50 3 mentioned. Then paragraph 4 deals with computation of marks for research experience. Paragraph 5 is in regard to guiding research and paragraph 6 is for projects. Paragraph 7 is for research publications including reviews and paragraph 8 provides for the books in the relevant subject. Paragraph 9 is for invention and discoveries and 10 is for awards/fellowship. Thus, a complete criteria is provided in REJ-2 to point out that how assessment is to be made for shortlisting a candidate.
When this is taken into consideration with Appendix 3 enclosed with Annexure P-4, then it is evident that 50% weightage is to the academic record and research performance which is to be adjudged in terms of the parameters provided in REJ 2. Similarly 30% weightage is for assessment of domain knowledge and teaching skills for which again the criteria is mentioned therein and therefore, once already is prescribed and as the heading of REJ 2 suggests the only Selection Committee was required to assess the performance by taking the interview. For the present to facilitate the petitioner to file copy of Regulations showing the criteria for constitution of Screening Committee, the case is adjourned.
Let complete set of relevant Regulations be filed including that of constitution of Selection Committee as well as Screening Committee etc. by 27.05.2024 with an advance copy to opposite party counsel.
List the case on 30.05.2024 on the top of the list.
(VIVEK AGARWAL) JUDGE ks Signature Not Verified Signed by: KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Signing time: 15-05-2024 19:19:50 4 Signature Not Verified Signed by: KOUSHALENDRA SHARAN SHUKLA Signing time: 15-05-2024 19:19:50