RAMAN NAIR Vs. UNIVERSITY OF COCHIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a Lecturer in Hindi,appo­inted on 3rd March,1969 to the University Centre,Cochin,governed then,by the Kerala University Act.With the passing of the Cochin University Act,1971(Act 30 of 1971)referred to as the Act "the University Centre,Cochin,stood trans­ferred to the Cochin University under section 24(3)of the said Act.Section 62 of the Act saves all Statutes,Ordinances,Rules and Regulations in force on the date of com­mencement of this Act in the Kerala University,except in so far as they are inconsistent with the Cochin Act,and till they are replaced by appropriate subordinate legislation under the Cochin Act.Such legislation has not so far been enacted.By Ext.P -1 notification,dated 30th of August,1972,the Registrar of the Cochin University invited appli­cations,inter alia,for the post of a Reader in Hindi.Section 29 of the Act provides that there shall be a Board of Appointments for the purpose of making selections for appointment of Professors,Readers and Lecturers in the University Service.The composition and the personnel of the Board is also indicated by that section.The Board is to consider the applications and submit to the Syndicate its recommendations as to the selections referred to it.If the Syndicate considers that the recommendations of the Board are not acceptable,it shall record its reasons and order a fresh selection.

(2.) IN accordance with Ext.P -1 notification,the peti­tioner and the third respondent were among the applicants interviewed by the Board.The petitioner has alleged that he was assigned rank No.1,and the third respondent,rank No.2.It is unnecessary to notice the ranks of the remain­ing persons interviewed by the Selection Committee or to detail the respective qualifications and merits of the petitioner and the third respondent.

(3.) THE facts regarding the interview and selection,stated by the petitioner and noticed earlier are not disputed in the counter affidavit of the University,But it was contended that under section 6(2)of the Act,the University was empowered to apply the concerned rules " mutatis mutandis " ;.This,according to the University,empowered it to make necessary changes so as to meet the particular needs of the University.It was said that having considered how best to implement the provisions of section 6(2)of the Act,the Syndicate of the University took a decision eviden­ced by Ext.P -2 Minutes,dated 17th July 1972.The relevant portion of Ext.P -2 reads as follows: "Preliminary minutes of the meeting of the Syndicate held on 17th July,1972 at 10 -30 A.M. Resolved that: (i)The rules mentioned under section 6(2)of Cochin Uni­versity Act,1971 be implemented in the case of teaching staff as a class except in the case of the post of Professor which shall be filled up exclusively in consideration of merit;but the reservation quota against this category should be provided additionally in the category of Readers,Lecturers,Teaching Assistants,etc.taken collectively." Ext.P -2 is traced to the Syndicate's powers under section 21(8)of the Act,to appoint teachers and other employees of the University of a particular rank and prescribe their duties.But that very section itself is "subject to the provi­sions of the Act "and,therefore,of section 6(2 ).As for the power of changing and altering Rules 14(a)to(c)and 15 to 17 of the State and Subordinate Service Rules,enjoined to be followed by section 6(2 ),we are inclined to think that the power to apply them 'mutatis mutandis ' ,would not include a power to make substantial changes or amendments to the rules themselves.Formal and inconsequential changes for dovetailing the rules into the frame -work of the Act,alone seem to be contemplated.Whatever that be,the provisions of section 6(2)themselves,cannot certainly be changed by the Syndicate.