JOSEPH THOMAS Vs. FR. JOSEPH NETTUNILAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner and 4th respondent are Professors working in St. George's College, Aruvithura of which the first respondent is the Manager. When a vacancy of Principal arose the petitioner who is the seniormost professor was not preferred. Instead the 4th respondent, a junior, third person in the seniority list was appointed as Principal. That appointment was approved by the University. Petitioner challenges Ext. P2 order by which the University granted approval to the appointment of the 4th respondent.

(2.) S.59 of the Gandhiji University Act, 1985 as amended by Gandhiji University Amendment and Special Provisions Ordinance 5 of 1988 provide for the appointment of Principal on the basis of seniority cum fitness. How the appointment on the basis of seniority cum fitness is to be made came up for consideration before the Full Bench in Rev. Mother Provincial & Others v. State of Kerala & Others ( 1969 KLT 749 ) while dealing with the similar provision contained in the Kerala University Act. Their Lordships stated the law as follows:-

(3.) The contention raised by the petitioner is that when the petitioner objected to the appointment the University ought to have gone into the question as to whether the 4th respondent was meritorious than the petitioner. The Vice-Chancellor also should have gone into the question as to whether the first respondent was competent to function as an educational agency. Since the Vice-chancellor refused to examine the above issues, it is alleged that the approval granted to the 4th respondent is illegal.