SHASHI AGGARWAL Vs. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a visually handicapped person. She has done her M. A. in Political Science and is stated to have also qualified NET in december, 2005. She had applied for her consideration for appointment to the post of Lecturer (Political Science) in Maitreyi College under University of delhi pursuant to an advertisement issued by respondents 2 and 3 on 4. 4. 2007. However, the advertisement dated 4. 4. 2007 stood superseded by another advertisement issued by respondent Nos. 2 and 3 on 5. 6. 2007 and this subsequent advertisement was issued pursuant to an order passed by the Division Bench of this Court on 4. 4. 2007 in WP (C) No. 16258/2006 directing all the colleges affiliated with University of Delhi to fill up 3% vacancies reserved for physically handicapped persons. In the first advertisement issued by respondent nos. 2 and 3 for inviting applications from eligible candidates for appointment to the post of Lecturer (Political Science), applications were invited from only female candidates. However, vide subsequent advertisement dated 5. 6. 2007, applications were invited from both male and female candidates belonging to physically handicapped category for filling up the vacant post of Lecturer (Political Science) and other posts mentioned in the said advertisement. The petitioner again made an application for her consideration for appointment in maitreyi College pursuant to subsequent advertisement dated 5. 6. 2007, which was issued pursuant to orders of the Division Bench dated 4. 4. 2007 in WP (C)No. 16258/2006.

(2.) THE petitioner along with other eligible candidates appeared for her interview before the Selection Committee but was found not suitable by the selection Committee for her appointment to the post of Lecturer (Political science) in Maitreyi College. The Selection Committee selected respondent No. 4 sh. Yogesh Chaurasia for his appointment to the post of Lecturer (Political science) in Maitreyi College and his selection was against a vacant post earmarked for visually handicapped persons. The petitioner aggrieved by the selection and appointment of respondent No. 4 has filed the present writ petition seeking quashing of selection and appointment of respondent No. 4 and for directions to the respondents to appoint her against post of Lecturer (Political science) with all consequential benefits.

(3.) THE case of the petitioner in this writ petition is that as per policy of the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 (Maitreyi College), only female candidates could have been appointed to the post of Lecturer (Political Science) for which the petitioner had also applied. The grievance of the petitioner is that respondent No. 4 happens to be a male candidate and should not have been selected or appointed in Maitreyi College which is a college meant only for girls.