Uttamkumar S. Bagde (Dr.) vs University of Pune and Others

Kurdukar, J.—The petitioner - Dr. Uttamkumar S. Bagde is presently working as Lecturer at the University Department of Life Sciences, University of Bombay. The petitioner, in paragraphs 3, 4, 5 and 6 of the petition has elaborately described his qualifications and the experience in the subjects of Micro biology and Bio-Technology. He has submitted various papers at the national as well as international seminars. He has also secured M. Phil and Ph. D. degree.

Pursuant to the advertisement published in the ''Indian Express'' newspaper dated 14th June, 1991 for the post of Reader in the University of Pune, Pune the petitioner applied for the said post. This post was reserved for scheduled caste candidate.

The petitioner was interviewed by the selection committee consisting five members. The interviews were held on 12th December, 1991. Alongwith the petitioner, one Dr. Subramaniam V. R. was also interviewed. The selection committee did not select the petitioner. Since the post was reserved for scheduled caste, another candidate viz. Dr. Subramaniam V. R. was also not considered. It is against this non-selection of the petitioner by the selection committee has given rise to this petition.

Incidentally, it may be stated that the Pune University has issued a fresh advertisement for the same post and reserving it for the scheduled caste.

Shri Morje, the learned counsel appearing in support of this petition, urged that the respondents have erroneously rejected the claim of the petitioner. The contention is that although the petitioner is qualified in terms of the advertisement, he was found to be not qualified for the post of Reader. In order to substantiate this argument, he drew our attention to paragraph 4 of the affidavit of Dr. Ashok Sadanand Kolaskar, Professor and Head of the Department of Zoology in the University of Pune, affirmed on 16th June, 1992. Paragraph 4 reads as under :-

"4. The petitioner has attached in the annexure several certificates to the petition. However, basic question was whether petitioner was qualified for this post inspite of his having Ph. D. degree. Petitioner has secured only 45% of marks in B. Sc. level examination and 49% of marks at the M. Sc. level examination. The University Grants Commission has laid down norms concerning qualifications for the appointment to the teaching posts in the University. The above mentioned academic performance of the petitioner does not fulfil the said norms of the University Grants Commission. I do not want to burden this affidavit with all the details regarding norms of the University Grants Commission, as the same are also mentioned in the affidavit, filed by the University through its Assistant Registrar Shri D. S. Shevale".

Shri Bhonsale, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, fairly stated that the petitioner''s application was not rejected on the ground that he did not fulfil the required qualifications. He further urged that since the petitioner fulfilled the requisite qualifications in terms of the advertisement, he was called for the interview but the selection committee found him not suitable. After perusing the advertisement, we are of the opinion that the petitioner does fulfil the educational qualifications and he was entitled to be considered for the post of Reader. Unfortunately for the petitioner, the selection committee constituted by the University of Pune did not find him suitable.

Shri Morje vehemently urged that the constitution of the selection committee was totally in violation of various Government resolutions and circulars. He urged that it was incumbent upon the University to include one member from the backward class in the selection committee. To substantiate this contention, he drew our attention to the Government Circular No. 1073-J dated 25th May, 1973 (see page 149 of the writ petition compilation). In our opinion, this circular does not help the petitioner for the simple reason that it relates to the recruitment of class III and class IV employees. Shri Morje drew our attention to section 57 and Section 77-C of the Pune University Act, 1974. Section 57 deals with committee for selection and appointment of University Teachers. Section 77-C deals with special provision for scheduled castes and tribes in service and post in University colleges and institutions. Both these sections do not prescribe any condition that whenever a selection committee is constituted, one of the members of such selection committee should be from amongst the backward class. Shri Morje was unable to draw our attention to any statutory provision contained in the Act or any Government circular or resolution in the Act or any Government circular or resolution which would make it obligatory upon the University of Pune to include one backward class member in the selection committee. In the absence of such statutory provision, we are unable to hold that the constitution of the selection committee in the present case was illegal or violative of any provisions of law or the Constitution.

Shri Morje then urged that the selection committee as well as the University failed to discharge the constitutional obligation. The contention of Shri Morje is that in respect of a candidate from the reserved category, norms of selection are different and it was incumbent upon the respondents to select the petitioner if he fulfills the minimum requirements. In support of this submission, he drew our attention to the decision of the Supreme Court in K.C. Vasanth Kumar and Another Vs. State of Karnataka, . He pointedly drew our attention to head-note and paragraph drew our attention to head-note and paragraph 4 of the judgment. There can hardly be any dispute as regards the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in paragraph 4 of the said judgment. The question that arises for our consideration is as to whether it is permissible for the Court to substitute its decision in the matter of selection of the Reader which is taken by the selection committee. In our opinion, the answer is in the negative. It is not for the Court in the present case to select a person in the academic field.

The submission of Shri Morje as regards the constitution of committee being contrary to the Government circulars and the resolutions also does not help him because in that event the whole process will have to be erased and fresh interviews will have to be taken. In the present case, as indicated earlier, the University of Pune has readvertised the post and it is reserved for scheduled caste.

It has then contended by Shri Morje that the members of the selection committee were biased and as a result thereof, the petitioner''s selection was not made and the whole process was a mala fide act on this part. He drew our attention to paragraph 38 at page 45 of the petition. In this behalf, Shri Bhonsale drew our attention to the affidavit of Dr. Ashok S. Kolaskar who was the member of the selection committee. He also drew our attention to the affidavit of Shri D. S. Shevale, the Registrar of the Pune University. After considering the material on record, we are unable to accept the plea of bias. The plea of mala fides is also not borne out from the record.

It is needless to add that in the event if the petitioner applies pursuant to the fresh advertisement to the post of Reader in dispute, the selection committee will evaluate afresh the petitioner''s performance independently without being influenced by the report of the earlier selection committee.

In our opinion, no case for interference is made out. Writ petition to stand summarily rejected. No order as to costs.