Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6.5. He further submitted that in the year 2018, the college in question came out with advertisement for appointment of Assistant Professor in different subjects and in pursuance of said advertisement selection process was completed as claimed by the writ petitioners. In the meantime, New Governing Body of the college in question has been constituted. The newly constituted Governing Body cancelled the selection made by the erstwhile Governing Body and came out with fresh Patna High Court CWJC No.10935 of 2021 dt.08-10-2024 advertisement dated 06.10.2019, as contained in Annexure-9 to the writ application. Thereafter, selection process was completed and appointments were made accordingly. 6.6. Mr. Prasad mainly harped on non-compliance of the provisions enshrined in Section 57 B of the Bihar Universities Act and submitted that Selection Committee for appointment of Assistant Professor as such was not constituted in terms of Section 57 B of the Bihar State Universities Act amended in the year 2013 in either of the two transactions for selection of candidates. The Selection Committee was constituted by the College on its own in contravention of statutory provisions of the Bihar State Universities Act, therefore, the appointment of Assistant Professors in different subjects in Mirza Ghalib College, Gaya is illegal. In fact, no information was given to the University regarding the entire selection process and everything has been done in an arbitrary manner. In support of his submission, learned counsel relied upon the judgement passed in CWJC No. 14793 of 2017 (Noor Alam Khan Vs. State of Bihar & Ors) and submitted that a challenge was made to the vires of Section 57 A of the Bihar State Universities Act and the same has been upheld by Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court. 6.7. Mr. Prasad, learned counsel for the University further Patna High Court CWJC No.10935 of 2021 dt.08-10-2024 submitted that if the college selects an expert for being a member of selection committee from the panel of experts approved by the Academic Council, the same by any stretch of imagination, cannot be termed as interference in the administration of affairs of the college. It is the bare minimum participation of the University which has to face audit of allocation of funds by State and other agencies. 6.8. In support of his submissions, Mr. Prasad relied on various judgments some of which are mentioned herein below:

7.1. He further submitted that when a candidate willingly and voluntarily participates in the selection process and is not successful, cannot thereafter turn around and claim that the said selection process is vitiated on any count.

7.2. He further submitted that it is well settled that a litigant cannot approbate and reprobate at the same time. It is admitted position that the writ petitioners participated in the earlier round of interviews held on 24.02.2019 and 17.02.2019 respectively. The said selection process was conducted only by two experts and in complete violation of Section 57 B (1) of the Bihar Universities Act, 1976 (as amended). They cannot claim to have any vested right for appointment pursuant to the said selection process of February, 2019. The Two Member Expert Committee Patna High Court CWJC No.10935 of 2021 dt.08-10-2024 had no jurisdiction to make any recommendations in favour of the petitioners. It is further admitted position that the writ petitioners having participated in the said interviews held on 04.02.2021 and 05.02.2021 and having not been selected, are precluded in law to maintain the instant writ application. 7.3. He further submitted that the college is recognized minority education institution in terms of Article 30(2) of the Constitution of India and it has been conferred upon with the right to establish and administer an educational institution which, inter alia, includes the powers to make appointments against the posts of teachers and other members of staff at the College against the sanctioned posts while adhering to the prescriptions laid down with respect to educational qualification and other eligibility criteria under the relevant Acts and Statutes. He further submitted that certain baseless and misconceived assertions have been made on behalf of respondent nos. 3 to 5, with respect to violation of the provisions contained under Section 57A and the Section 57 B of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976, whereas as a matter of fact, while conducting the process of selection in furtherance of advertisement dated 06.10.2019 issued by the College, all necessary steps have been taken and the provisions contained under the Section 57A and Patna High Court CWJC No.10935 of 2021 dt.08-10-2024 the Section 57 B of the Bihar State Universities Act, 1976 have been strictly adhered to.

10.23. From the above discussions, it is evident that in case of Minority Institution, Chairman of the College has right to nominate, three expert out of the list of five persons preferably from Minority Community and who have been recommended by the Vice-Chancellor from the panel of experts proposed by the Academic Council of the University. Therefore, the Governing Body of the College has vital role in constitution of Selection Patna High Court CWJC No.10935 of 2021 dt.08-10-2024 Committee. According to the Act, the University has only role to provide a list of qualified experts out of whom the Chairman of the Governing Body will nominate from expert and i.e. the preferably of Minority Community. Thus, even after introduction of new Section 57A and 57B in Bihar State Universities Act, the Selection Committee is predominantly of persons from the college itself. In the present case, the Selection Committee was constituted and the entire selection process has been conducted in complete breach of Section 57 B of the Act as quorum required for Selection Committee was totally missing, rendering the constitution of interview board, illegal and arbitrary.