Mrs. Neelam Verma vs Thaper Institute of Engineering and Technology and Others

M.R. Agnihotri, J.—This writ petition has been filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India by Mrs. Neelam Verma, Lecturer in Chemistry of Thaper Institute of Engineering and Technology at Patiala, praying for the quashing of selection to the post of Lecturer in Chemistry made by the Institute in June, 1987, and instead, for regularising the services of the petitioner and for payment of her salary for the vacation period, etc.

The petitioner claims to have a good academic career to her credit. She is M.Sc. in Chemistry and has also qualified M.Phil, with 70 per cent marks and has also done Ph.D. in the same subject. She also claims to have done some research work for about seven years, besides possessing teaching experience as Lecturer in Chemistry for about two years in Thapar Institute of Engineering and Tehnology at Patiala, as well as in the Punjab University, Patiala.

In March 1986, the petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Chemistry on ad hoc basis upto 31st May, 1986. Since from 1st June, 1986 to 23rd July, 1986, there were vacations in the Institute, the petitioner was reappointed from 24th July, 1986, upto 31st December, 1986. Later on, the services of the petitioner were further extended upto 30th June, 1987, whereafter the appointment was to come to an end. In the meantime, in March, 1986, the respondent Thapar Institute advertised one post of Lecturer in Chemistry inviting applications from the persons possessing qualifications prescribed by the University Grants Commission. The petitioner also applied in response to the said advertisement, along with the other candidates, but she was not selected. Since the person selected did not join, the post was kept vacant. The respondent Institute readvertised the vacancy in February, 1987, by changing the qualifications in the advertisement. According to the petitioner, the change in the advertisement had been made to exclude her from the competition and with that end in view, the subject of Chemistry was trifurcated into Physical Chemistry, Organic Chemistry and Solid State Chemistry; thereby excluding Inorganic Chemistry in which Branch the petitioner had specialisation to her credit, which fact was fully known to the management of the respondent Institute in which the petitioner had been working for the last one year. Despite this, the petitioner applied in response to the advertisement and was interviewed by a Selection Committee which, however, rejected her in June, 1987. This selection has been challenged by the petitioner mainly on the ground that the members of the Selection Committee did not attach any weightage to the Inorganic Chemistry in which Branch the petitioner had specialised, and in any case the Degree in M.Sc. was awarded in the subject as a whole and not in any part thereof. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the prescription of the qualifications, as incorporated in the advertisement, was wholly arbitrary and without any rational basis.

When the writ petition came up for motion hearing on June 29, 1987, notice of motion was issued for 28th July, 1987, and in the meantime, termination of services of the petitioner was stayed. Later on, after hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, the Motion Bench (D.B.) modified the order to the extent that since another Lecturer had joined in place of the petitioner in the meantime, he was allowed to continue but the respondent Institute was directed to continue paying salary to the petitioner even if no work was taken from her during this period. In these circumstances, the petitioner has been continuing drawing her salary from the respondent Institute till today.

In reply to the writ petition, written statement has been filed by the Thaper Institute of Engineering and Technology, respondent No. 1, in which the prescription of qualifications in the advertisement by trifurcating the subject of Chemistry is sought to be justified on the ground that the advertisement was made as per the requirements of the Institute and not to prejudicially affect the candidature of the petitioner. It has further been asserted that "it is upto the respondent to advertise for posts consistent with the needs of the Institute".

An additional affidavit by way of replication to the written statement was allowed to be filed on 14th October, 1987, in which it was reiterated that trifurcation of the subject of Chemistry into different papers/choice was contrary to the qualifications laid down by the University Grants Commission, as "Master''s Degree in the subject concerned" alone was the qualification laid down by the University Grants Commission. It has further been stated that since there was no change in the syllabus to be taught to the students during the next year, there was neither any necessity nor any justification for changing the qualifications. Though the petitioner has also challenged the selection on other grounds by attributing mala fides and favouritism against the members of the Selection Committee, no documentary evidence or cogent material has been placed on the record in support of the same. However, a certificate from Dr. B.M. Nayar, Professor and Head of the Department of Applied Sciences and Humanities, of the Thaper Institute of Engineering and Technology, respondent Institute itself, has been annexed as Annexure P-3, relevant portion whereof is to the following effect:

Dr. Verma (30) has been a good student and showed nice results at various University examinations. She passed her Matriculation Examination in high First Division (73%) and did her B.Sc. (55%) and M.Sc. (56%) in high Second Division. She earned her M.Phil. (70%) in 1978-79 from Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra, in 1982 aided by a Bureau of Police Research and Development Scholarship, she started her doctoral research with Dr. A.L.J. Rao on ''Spectrophotometric and Polarographic Estimation of some Pesticides and Metallic Poisons''. She successfully defended her dissertation in March, 1986.

She is co-author of several research papers, which have appeared in Indian and foreign Journals, She also developed new techniques for the estimation of pesticides and distinguished herself at an International Symposium on ''Advanced Electro Analytical Techniques'', sponsored jointly by the U.G.C. and the Ministry of Defence at the University of Jodhpur.

Dr. Neelam has rich professional experience which includes eight years of research and two years of teaching. She taught M. Sc. Final Year of Forensic Science for five months (Aug.-Dec, 1985) and First Year Chemistry at Thapar Institution here for fourteen months (March 86-June 87) on ad hoc basis.

After hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and having considered their pleadings and examined the material on the record, I am of the considered view that the qualifications incorporated in the impugned advertisement for the post of Lecturer in Chemistry were not in accordance with the requirements of the subject and consequently the selection made on the basis thereof suffered from the vice of arbitrariness. The petitioner has placed reliance on the Ordinances and Outlines of the Tests Syllabi and Courses of Reading for M.Sc. (Chemistry) Final Examination, of the Punjabi University, Patiala, to which the respondent Institute was earlier affiliated. According to this University Publication, the subject of "Master''s Degree in M.Sc. (Chemistry)" and other Branches, like Inorganic Chemistry, Solid State Chemistry, Physical Chemistry, and Organic Chemistry are all its various papers. If qualifications had been incorporated in the advertisement with proper description, as is 25 the requirement of the University Grants Commission, and due importance had been attached and weightage given to the achievements of the candidates and the attainments acquired by them in various fields as subdivisions of the main subject of Chemistry, the possibility of the result of the selection being different could not be ruled out. The petitioner, who has already taught the M. Sc. classes for more than a year could not be rendered unqualified or less meritorious just by whim and caprice of the respondent Institute, especially when her academic qualifications, technical experience and professional competence stand fully vouchsafed by the Head of the Department of the respondent Institute.

Under the above circumstances, I have no hesitation in holding that the selection made on the basis of the impugned advertisement was wholly arbitrary and the same is set aside. The respondent Institute is directed to hold the selection afresh by incorporating in the advertisement the qualifications strictly in accordance with the syllabus and courses of Study and keeping in view the requirements and norms laid down by the University Grants Commission. The respondents are further directed to continue paying salary to the petitioner till regular selection in accordance with the above directions is made. The petitioner shall also be entitled to the salary for the vacation period, that is, from 1st June, 1986, to 23rd July, 1986, as prayed by her. Accordingly, the writ petition stands allowed, with no order as to costs.