B. Satish Vijay Kumar vs Adi Kavi Nannaiah University, on 16 July, 2018

[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Telangana High Court

B. Satish Vijay Kumar vs Adi Kavi Nannaiah University, on 16 July, 2018

Bench: P.Naveen Rao

           HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

               WRIT PETITION NO.21287 OF 2018

                         Date: 16.07.2018

Between:

B.Satish Vijay Kumar, s/o. B.B.L.Vijay Kumar,
Aged 39 years, Assistant Professor, Adhoc Department
of Mathematics, Adi Kavi Nannaiah University,
Rajamahendravaram, East Godavari District.

                                                       .....Petitioner
     and

Adi Kavi Nannaiah University, Rajamahendravaram,
East Godavari District, rep.by its Registrar and others.

                                                    .....Respondents




The Court made the following:
                                                                    PNR,J
                                                     W.P.No.21287 of 2018

                                  2

           HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO

               WRIT PETITION NO.21287 OF 2018
ORDER:

Petitioner is aggrieved by non-renewal of further contract as Assistant Professor (Ad hoc) for the present academic year while granting such renewal to others vide proceedings dated 31.05.2018.

2. Petitioner was appointed in the year 2013 on contract basis for one year and renewed from time to time. According to learned counsel for petitioner, contract is not renewed on the ground that petitioner does not possess NET/SLET certificate, whereas the NET/SLET scheduled to be held in September, 2018 and that if some time is granted, petitioner would clear the examination.

3. Along with the counter-affidavit, undertaking given by the petitioner is enclosed at running page no.38. The undertaking would disclose that on 28.06.2017, petitioner sought further time to acquire the minimum qualification of NET/SLET/Ph.D., on or before 31st December, 2017 and if such qualification is not acquired, the undertaking would be treated as letter of resignation and his services may be terminated. Learned standing counsel would submit that in view of said undertaking, it is no more open to petitioner to contend that others cannot be appointed and that his contract should be renewed.

4. According to learned standing counsel, some other person was already appointed in the place of petitioner. However, no material is placed on record to show that another person is appointed in the place of petitioner.

PNR,J W.P.No.21287 of 2018 3

5. Having regard to the undertaking given by petitioner and clear statement that if he does not pass the examination in the requisite qualification by 31.12.2017, he should be treated as resigned and can be terminated, it is no more open to petitioner to contend that his contract ought to have been renewed. It is appropriate to note that even by now requisite qualification is not acquired.

6. No relief as sought for can be granted. However, liberty is granted to petitioner to submit an application to the Registrar respondent-University to grant renewal and some more time to pass NET/SLET examination. If such request is made, same may be considered, provided no other person is appointed in his place. Writ Petition is accordingly dismissed. Pending miscellaneous petitions shall stand closed.

___________________________ JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO Date: 16.07.2018 kkm PNR,J W.P.No.21287 of 2018 4 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE P.NAVEEN RAO WRIT PETITION NO.21287 OF 2018 Date: 16.07.2018 kkm

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Telangana High Court