UMESH KUMAR Vs. JAMIA MILLIA ISLAMIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, in pursuance to the advertisement dated 7th February, 2011 of the respondent No.1 University, has applied inter alia for the post of Assistant Professor under the ST category in the Department of Conservative Dentistry and Endodontics. He has filed this writ petition averring that without disclosing the outcome of the selection procedure, the respondent No.1 University has appointed somebody else, who had not even participated in the selection process, on contractual basis on the said post and is also intending to confirm him to the said post. THE writ petition has been filed seeking a direction for appointment of the petitioner and for payment of compensation etc.

(2.) ATTENTION of the counsel for the petitioner is invited to judgment dated 3rd May, 2011in W.P.(C) No.178/2011 titled Dr. Prem Lata Vs. GNCT of Delhi wherein the case law in this regard has been noticed, holding that an applicant for a post has only a right to be considered therefor and even if selected, has no right to seek appointment. Reference may also be made to State of Bihar Vs. Kaushal Kishore Singh (1998) 9 SCC 104. In that view of the matter, the only question which remains is whether the petitioner has been considered or not.

(3.) HOWEVER, Ajay Hasia (supra) is a case relating to admission in an educational institution. Attention of the counsel for the petitioner is invited to Lila Dhar Vs. State of Rajasthan (1981) 4 SCC 159 where the Apex Court has observed that the judgments concerning interview and relating to appointment to educational institutions do not apply to recruitments where interview is the only way to determine the suitability of the candidate for the post advertised.