TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 1434X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uestion the method of selection is no longer res integra - In Dr. G. Sarana v. University of Lucknow and Ors. [1976 (7) TMI 168 - SUPREME COURT], a similar question came for consideration before a three Judges Bench of this Court where the fact was that the Petitioner had applied to the post of Professor of Athropology in the University of Lucknow. It was held in the case that the failure of the Appellant to take the identical plea at the earlier stage of the proceedings created an effective bar of waiver against him. The Division Bench has committed grave error in law by passing the impugned judgment reversing the order passed by the learned Single Judge. Appeal allowed - respondent has no case on merit - decided against respondent. - M. Yusuf Eqbal and Arun Mishra, JJ. For Appearing Parties: V. Mohana, Sr. Adv., N.L. Rajah, Santanam Swaminadhan, Insha Mir, Sidharth Rajah, Anil Kumar Tandale, Gautam Narayan, R.A. Iyer, Amitesh Kumar, Shashank Shekhar Singh, Navin Prakash, Vijay Kumar, Satish Vig and B. Ragunath, Advs. JUDGMENT M. Yusuf Eqbal, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment and order dated 09. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le Judge of the Madras High Court dismissed the writ petition by a reasoned judgment on two grounds. Firstly, it was held that the writ petition was not maintainable inasmuch as the Institute is not a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. The learned Single Judge secondly held that there is no discrepancy with regard to the qualification mentioned in the advertisement and the service rules. Finally, learned Single Judge held that Respondent No. 1-writ Petitioner having taken part in the selection process without raising any objection cannot challenge the selection process after being declared unsuccessful by not including his name in the Selection List. 8. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the Respondent preferred the writ appeal before the Division Bench of the Madras High Court. The Division Bench allowed the appeal and reversed the order passed by the learned Single Judge. On the issue of maintainability of writ petition, the Division Bench in the impugned order held that the duties being performed by the Appellant-Institute are in the nature of public function and, therefore, it would come within the ambit of 'State' Under Article 12 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isement and the rules and also irregularity in the constitution of the Committee who conducted interview for selection of the candidates. 15. Indisputably, the Madras Institute of Development Studies (MIDS) is governed by its Faculty Recruitment Rules, 2001. The Rules apply to the selection and appointment of persons to the post of Assistant Professor (Research Associates), Associate Professor (Fellow) and Professor we are here concerned with the qualifications required for appointment of a person to the post of Associate Professor. The Rules read as under: Associate Professor (Rule) Good academic record with a doctoral degree or equivalent published work with five years of experience of teaching and/or research. 16. The qualification mentioned for the post of Associate Professor in the advertisement reads as under: Associate Professor (ADVT) Good academic record with a doctoral degree in Social Sciences, with at least 5 (five) published papers in reputed national/international journals/edited volume-or equivalent thereof-and experience of research/teaching at University/national level research institutions. 17. From a reading of the necessary qualification ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ere the fact was that the Petitioner had applied to the post of Professor of Athropology in the University of Lucknow. After having appeared before the Selection Committee but on his failure to get appointed, the Petitioner rushed to the High Court pleading bias against him of the three experts in the Selection Committee consisting of five members. He also alleged doubt in the constitution of the Committee. Rejecting the contention, the Court held: 15. We do not, however, consider it necessary in the present case to go into the question of the reasonableness of bias or real likelihood of bias as despite the fact that the Appellant knew all the relevant facts, he did not before appearing for the interview or at the time of the interview raise even his little finger against the constitution of the Selection Committee. He seems to have voluntarily appeared before the committee and taken a chance of having a favourable recommendation from it. Having done so, it is not now open to him to turn round and question the constitution of the committee. This view gains strength from a decision of this Court in Manak Lal's case where in more or less similar circumstances, it was held tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l that more than 19% marks have been earmarked for viva voce test, the Petitioner is not entitled to challenge the criteria or process of selection. Surely, if the Petitioner's name had appeared in the merit list, he would not have even dreamed of challenging the selection. The Petitioner invoked jurisdiction of the High Court Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India only after he found that his name does not figure in the merit list prepared by the Commission. This conduct of the Petitioner clearly disentitles him from questioning the selection and the High Court did not commit any error by refusing to entertain the writ petition. 24. In the case of Ramesh Chandra Shah and Ors. v. Anil Joshi and Ors. (2013) 11 SCC 309, recently a Bench of this Court following the earlier decisions held as under: In view of the propositions laid down in the above noted judgments, it must be held that by having taken part in the process of selection with full knowledge that the recruitment was being made under the General Rules, the Respondents had waived their right to question the advertisement or the methodology adopted by the Board for making selection and the learned Single Jud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
