(1.) The 1st Respondent-University issued a notification on 5.5.2007 calling for applications to the posts of Deputy Librarian alongwith other posts. The Petitioner as well as the 3rd Respondent applied for the post of Deputy Librarian. Interview letters were issued to both of them on 30.10.2007. The 3rd Respondent is appointed on 22.11.2007 as per Annexure-D to the post of Deputy Librarian. Consequently, the Petitioner was not appointed to the said post. The appointment of the 3rd Respondent is called in question in this writ petition.
(2.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that the 3rd Respondent did not have requisite qualification of Ph.D. degree and that he did not possess the equivalent research experience in the field relevant to the profession. Though the Petitioner had taken up the contention in the writ petition that the 3rd Respondent did not have requisite percentage of marks and experience as Assistant Librarian, the same were not pressed into service at the time of the arguments. Even otherwise, the records reveal that the 3rd Respondent has got more than 55% of marks in the qualifying examination which was the prescribed qualification for making the application. He also had the requisite experience of more than 8 years as Assistant Librarian. Thus the only question to be considered is as to whether the 3rd Respondent has possessed Ph.D. degree or possesses equivalent research experience in the field relevant to the profession or not.
(3.) The statement of objections are filed by the University as well as the selected candidate. The records produced by them clearly reveal that the Petitioner did not have 8 years experience as Assistant Librarian.