Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jai Narain Vyas University Jod. & Anr vs Dr. Navneeta Singh on 8 November, 2017
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No. 903 / 2017
1. Jai Narain Vyas University, Jodhpur through its Registrar,
Jodhpur (Raj.)
2. The Registrar, Jai Narain Vyas University, Jodhpur (Raj.)
----Appellants
Versus
Dr. Navneeta Singh D/o Dr. K.N. Katiyar, R/o B-42, Dharam
Narayan Ka Hatha Paota, District Jodhpur (raj.)
----Respondent
_____________________________________________________
For Appellant(s) : Ms. Avni Choudhary on behalf of
Mr. Deepesh Singh Beniwal.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. Harshit Bhurani.
_____________________________________________________
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMCHANDRA SINGH JHALA
Order 08/11/2017
1. Issue which the appellant seeks to raise was decided by this Bench on 11.08.2017 in a batch of writ appeals, lead matter being D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.485/2017, Jai Narain Vyas University, Jodhpur vs. Dr. Narendra Mishra. The order reads as under:
"1. By the impugned decision dated 19th December, 2016 the learned Single Judge has decided the limited issue of respondents candidature for promotion to the post of Professor under Career Advancement Scheme being rejected on the interpretation put by the appellants to Ordinance 317(B). The reason given for rejection, that the respondents were not eligible on account of lack of 5 research papers after designation as Associate Professor, has been found to be faulty by the learned Single Judge.
2. Learned counsel for the appellants states today in Court that the appellants have no quarrel today with the (2 of 2) [SAW-903/2017] interpretation of the Ordinance in question by the learned Single Judge.
3. Thus, nothing would survive for consideration. But, since there is some confusion in the mind of the appellants a word needs to be spoken further.
4. The confusion arises out of the Regulations framed by the UGC in the year 2010 laying down a criteria for appraisal under the Career Advancement Scheme. The appraisal has to be reflected in cumulative API scores using PBAS scoring proforma. The Regulations of 2010 appear to have been amended from time to time. The same do not relate to the eligibility to be considered for promotion under Career Advancement Scheme. The same relates to performance evaluation based whereon a candidate would be assessed as being fit or unfit for Career Advancement.
5. The appellants are free to appraise the respondents under the Career Advancement Scheme in terms of the Regulations framed by the University Grants Commission and as adopted by the appellant University.
6. The necessary appraisals would now be completed within four weeks from today under intimation to the respondents.
7. The writ appeals are disposed of."
2. Incorporating the reasons in the order dated 11.08.2017 in the present order the writ appeal is disposed of in same terms. (RAMCHANDRA SINGH JHALA)J. (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG)C.J. Mohit Tak