G VENKATESH PRASAD Vs. UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURE SCIENCE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN both these writ petitions, the petitioners are seeking similar relief. As the grievance made by both the petitioners are similar in nature, both these writ petitions are clubbed together and are heard and disposed of by this common order.

(2.) THE petitioner in W. P. No. 13547/2005 has applied for the post of Director of Extension, whereas the petitioner in W. P. No. 13543/ 2005 has applied for the post of Director of instructions. Both the petitioners have sought directions to the respondent- University to call them for interview to the post to which they have applied which was scheduled to be held on 19. 04. 2005 and 18. 04. 2005 respectively and defer the process of appointment until the petitioners are considered for appointment. The contention of the petitioners are that they have applied for the post, as mentioned above under the respondent-University for which Notification dated 05. 10. 2004 calling for applications was issued. Petitioners claim that they are fully qualified for the post in question as per the notification. Copy of the notification is produced at annexure-A to the writ petitions.

(3.) IT is the contention of the petitioner in W. P. No. 13547/05 that he has 30 years experience in the University, out of which he has served for 11 years in the cadre of Professor. He submits that he possesses a First Class Masters Degree and holds Ph. D in the subject Agriculture Extension. The Petitioner further claims that even during the year 1996-97 when the University of agricultural Science, Dharwad called for applications for filling up the post, petitioner being eligible had applied for the same and was called for interview by the authorities of the said university. In view of the same, the petitioner contends that he is fully eligible to be called for interview. Despite the same, though juniors and persons having lesser qualification have been called for interview he is denied of the opportunity is his grievance. In this regard though he made a representation dated 13. 04. 2005 as per Annexure "e" requesting the authorities to inform the reason why he has not been called for interview while others similarly placed were intimated of the interview there was no response.