Dr. Alok Kumar Srivastava vs Uttarakhand Ayurved University And Others

Raghvendra Singh Chauhan, CJ

The petitioner has challenged the legality of the advertisement, dated 09.07.2021 issued, by the Vice Chancellor of the Uttarakhand Ayurved

University, wherein two posts for Professor, in the Department of Panchkarma, were advertised.

Briefly, the facts of the case are that the petitioner had completed his Graduation (BAMS), in the Indian Medicine in 2002, from the Government

Ayurvedic College, Varanasi. His name is registered as Doctor with the Bhartiya Chikitsa Parishad, Uttar Pradesh. Subsequently, in 2004, he

completed his MD from the Banaras Hindu University. Thereafter, on 03.07.2005 he joined as a Lecturer in the Rishikul Government Ayurvedic

College, Haridwar. In 2008, he joined as a Lecturer in the Ayurved and Unani Tibbia College, New Delhi. Subsequently, on 12.01.2011 he again joined

the Rishikul Government Ayurvedic College, Haridwar. While the petitioner was teaching at the said College, in 2013 he completed his Ph.D in

Panchkarma. Thereafter, on 20.02.2015 he was promoted to the post of Associate Professor. He was duly nominated as a Professor on 26.12.2016.

While he was discharging his academic duties, he also acted as the Deputy Registrar and Proctor of the University.

According to the petitioner, on 14.02.2020, the faculty members were asked by the University to submit their applications for promotion to the post

of Professor, as provided under the Career Advancement Scheme under the Uttarakhand Ayurved University Rules and Regulations, 2015. Pursuant

to the said request, the petitioner claims that he had submitted his application for promotion. Although, the petitioner has submitted his application for

quite some time, the University is sitting over the entire issue. Therefore, on 09.12.2020, the petitioner had submitted a representation to the

University. Even thereafter, on 01.02.2021, he has submitted another representation to the University. Consequently, he was called for interview on

24.02.2021 for the post of Professor in the Department of Panchkarma. However, on 23.02.2021 he received a letter from the University informing

him that the interview has been cancelled. But, no reasons were assigned for the same. Further, according to the petitioner, on 09.07.2021, suddenly

the University has issued an advertisement for two posts of Professor in the Department of Panchkarma. Hence, the present writ petition before this

Court.

Mr. Suyash Pant, the learned counsel for the University, informs this Court that, in fact, there are four sanctioned posts of Professor in the

Department of Panchkarma. Out of the said four posts, two posts are for promotion, and two for direct recruitment. Already one promotional post is

occupied. However, the second post for promotion is lying vacant. Against this very post, the name of the petitioner is being considered. Two posts,

which were for direct recruitment, have been advertised by the impugned advertisement. Therefore, according to the learned counsel, the University is

justified in advertising the two posts for direct recruitment. By the impugned advertisement, the civil and fundamental rights of the petitioner are not

adversely affected. According to him, the case of the petitioner is already under consideration for promotion. Therefore, according to the learned

counsel, the present Writ Petition is highly misplaced

Mr. P.K. Chauhan, the learned counsel for the petitioner, requests that the statement of the learned counsel for the University should be recorded

as abovementioned.

Since, the petitioner’s case is already under consideration against the one vacant promotional post, no further direction needs to be issued by

this Court.

Therefore, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.