Dr.K.Ganesan vs University Grants Commission on 12 July, 2010

[Cites 5, Cited by 2]

Madras High Court

Dr.K.Ganesan vs University Grants Commission on 12 July, 2010

2.The question arise for consideration in this writ petition is whether the 6th respondent college is entitled to fill up the post of Principal by inviting applications only from the teaching staff of that college without making proper advertisement in the newspaper and whether the 6th respondent college is entitled to fill up the post of Principal by promotion without resorting to calling for applications from all suitable candidates by way of "Direct Recruitment."

3.The petitioner claims to be a postgraduate and also obtained Ph.D. and is now working as Lecturer in the Vivekandadha College, Agastheeswaram, Kanyakumari District. According to the petitioner, he came to know that the 6th respondent issued a circular, dated 01.07.2009 to all the Lecturers working in the college, calling for applications for the post of Principal and according to the petitioner, as per UGC Norms and Regulations 2000, the post of Principal can be filled up only by "Direct Recruitment" and it cannot be filled up by promotion and the 6th respondent college without inviting applications through newspapers cannot fill up the post of Principal from only among the members of the teaching staff on promotion.

4.The 6th respondent filed a counter stating that as per the qualification prescribed by UGC regulation, the post of Principal is to be filled up and as per G.O.Ms.No.1785, Education, dated 05.12.1998, as amended by order, dated.10.07.1989, the post of Principal can be filled up by promotion and as per provisions of the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Act and Rules 1976, the method of "Direct Recruitment" can be resorted to when suitable candidates are not available for giving promotion. It is further stated that the 6th respondent is not a compromising the qualification and only on the basis of the UGC Regulations 2000, the qualification has been prescribed for the post of Principal and as per Rule 11 (4)(i) & (ii) of the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Rules, the post of Principal can be filled up by promotion, who satisfies the qualification prescribed by the UGC and therefore, the writ is not maintainable.

5.Mr.R.Subramanian, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that as per UGC Regulations 2000, the post of Principal has to be filled by "Direct Recruitment" and the person must possess the qualification prescribed therein and the selection is only through the Selection Committee consisting of persons stated therein and in this case, without resorting to "Direct Recruitment" by giving wide publication calling for applications for the post of Principal, the 6th respondent college is attempting to appoint one of the Lecturer employed in the college by giving promotion and even though, those persons may satisfy the qualification prescribed by UGC without inviting applications by making proper advertisement, the post cannot be filled up by giving promotion to the existing teachers employed in the college.

6.In support of his contention, the learned counsel appearing for relied upon the judgments reported in 2003 Writ L.R. 615, in the case of Dr.T.Venkatraman and the Director of Collegiate Education, College Road, Chennai-6 and 3 others, (2008)2 MLJ 593, in the case of Secretary, Kamaraj College, Thoothukudi vs. D.S.Arulmani, Reader and Head of Department of Tamil, Kamaraj College, Thoothukudi and others and 2006 Writ L.R. 390, in the case of Dr.S.Arulmani vs. Government of Tamil Nadu, by its Secretary and Commissioner, Department of Higher Education, Fort St. George, Chennai and 5 others.

7.Per contra, Mr.D.Rajendran, the learned counsel appearing for the 6th respondent submitted that as per G.O.Ms.No.111, Higher Education (HI) Department, dated 24.03.1999, the post of Principal can be filled up by giving promotion, who satisfies the qualification and it is not necessary to appoint the Principal by "Direct Recruitment" and as per Rule 11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Rules, "Direct Recruitment" can be resorted to only when qualified candidates are not available in the college and in the 6th respondent college Lecturers and Readers are having the requisite qualifications for appointment to the post of Principal as per UGC Norms and qualification and therefore, the action of the 6th respondent in appointing the suitable Lecturer having the prescribed qualification for the post of Principal cannot be faulted. He further submitted that as per regulation, a Selection Committee has been constituted for appointing the Principal and therefore, the action of the 6th respondent in selecting the Principal cannot be interfered with. He further submitted that the petitioner has no locus standi to file the writ petition and on the ground also the writ is liable to be dismissed.

8.I have given my anxious consideration to the submission made by the counsels.

9.It is seen from the counter filed by the 6th respondent and the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the 6th respondent, Mr.D.Rajendran that as per G.O.Ms.No.111 Higher Education (H1), Department, dated 24.03.1999, the post of Principal can be filled up by making promotion, teachers working in the college, who satisfies the qualification and as per Rule 11(4) of the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Rules, "Direct Recruitment" can be resorted to only when suitable candidates are not available in service.

10.In this case, it is admitted that the qualification prescribed by the UGC is followed in the matter of appointment and the only question is whether the 6th respondent college without resorting to "Direct Recruitment" by calling for applications from the public, fill up the post of Principal by giving promotion to the Lecturers working in the college.

11.This issue is no longer res-integra and this Court in the judgment reported in 2003 W.L.R 615, in the case of Dr.T.Venkataraman vs. The Director of Collegiate Education has dealt with this question and answered as follows:-

"18.A perusal of the Annexure disclose that for the post of a 'Principal' either from Professor's Grade or Reader's Grade, apart from a Master' Degree with 55% of marks, a Ph.D. or equivalent published work is the minimum qualification. While in the case of Professor Grade, 15 years experience in teaching is required, in the case of Reader Grade 10 years experience in teaching is prescribed. Therefore, according to the UGC Regulations, it is crystal clear that the possession of a Ph.D. is a must for the post of 'Principal',. In the caption to the Anneuxure and also in the sub title above the post of 'Principal', it is stipulated that appointment of persons with the minimum qualification prescribed to be made through "open advertisement" "direct recruitment". The said Annexure prescribes the qualifications for other categories of Teachers as well. At the end of the Annexure, in the Notes, it is provided to what extent, any relaxation can be shown. But even in that Notes, there is no provision for relaxation in the matter of qualifications for any post, much less the post of 'Principal'.

19.While in Anneuxre, under the sub title 1.0.0., Direct Recruitment is shown under which the post of "Principal" "Professor, Reader, Lecturer for various faculties are shown, under the caption "Career Advancement' in para 2.0.0., the various other posts are shown. while under the caption 'Selection committee Recommended by the UGC' in para 3.0.0., the selection of candidates recommended by the UGC for various posts are shown. While for all other posts other than the post of 'Principal' apart from the mode of Direct Recruitment , the method of selection by way of promotion is also provided, in so far as the post of 'Principal' is concerned, the only method of appointment prescribed is by way of 'Direct Recruitment., Therefore, it will have to be stated that for the post of 'Principal, the appointment as per the GUC Regulations can be made only by way of a Direct Recruitment and there is no scope for promoting a person from the existing Teachers of the institution by following any other method.

20.Therefore, for the post of 'Principal' apart from Master's Degree, with minimum of 55% of marks or its equivalent grade, the possession of Ph.D is a 'must' and the selection and appointment to the post of 'Principal' can only be by way of Direct recruitment and Director Recruitment alone. this position, in my view, is also strengthened by the subsequent communication of the UGC itself dated 11.10.2001 wherein, the Under Secretary, UGC has made it clear in no uncertain terms to the following effect:

"With reference to your letter dated 22.089.2001 regarding qualifications for the post of Principal, I would like to inform you that Ph.D. is a compulsory recruitment for appointment of Principal w.e.f .24.12.1998. As per UGC's norms Ph.D or equivalent published work is required. This has been notified as Regulations w.e.f. 04.04.2000. U.G.C Regulations are mandatory in nature. The post of Principal is to be filled through direct recruitment only and no promotion is allowed. A copy of the UGC's circular in this regard is also enclosed for your information." (Underlining is mine).

21.The enclosed Circular is dated 06.06.200 which was sent to the Registrar of all Universities, which reads as under:-'IN continuation of this office letter No.F.3/1-94(PS) dated 24.12.1998 regarding qualifications for the post of Principal, I would like to inform you that one of the essential qualifications namely "Ph.D. or equivalent qualification" should be read as "Ph.D. or equivalent published work.". The Universities are requested to frame guidelines as per the provisions in their Arts & Statutes toe stablish the equivalence of the published work with the Ph.D."

22.Thus a reading of the UGC Regulations 2000 with its Annexure prescribing the qualifications for the post of 'Principal' specifically providing for its appointment by way of Direct Recruitment with the stress made by the UGC itself in its communication dated 11.10.2001, it can be safely concluded that for the post of 'Principal' in an institution like that of the second respondent, while the minimum qualification is, a PG Degree with 55% of marks,and also a Ph.D., or equivalent published work with the required experience and that any appointment to that post an only be by way of Direct recruitment and not by way of promotion."

Therefore, as per the above judgment of this Court, the argument of the 6th respondent cannot be accepted and the post of Principal can be filled up only by Direct Recruitment and while filing up the post by "Direct Recruitment"

advertisement has to be made in leading newspapers calling for applications from all qualified persons and without doing so, the 6th respondent cannot fill up the post of Principal. Therefore, the impugned order is quashed and the 6th respondent is directed to issue fresh publication, calling for applications for filling up the post of Principal persisting the qualifications as laid down by the UGC Regulations 2000 and thereafter, form a Selection Committee as per UGC Norms and filled up that post.

12.With the above observation, this writ petition is allowed. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petitions are closed. No costs.

er To,

1.University Grants Commission, rep by its Secretary, Bahadurshan Zafar Marg, New Delhi-2.

2.The Government of Tamil Nadu, Rep. by its Secretary, Departm,ent of Higher Education, Fort St. George, chennai.

3.The Director of Collegiate Education, College Road, Nungambakkam, Chennai-6.

4.The Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department, Nungambakkam, Chennai.

5.The Additional Government Pleader, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Madras High Court