KAMAL KISHORE Vs. STATE OF UTTARANCHAL AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has challenged the selection and appointment to the post of Laboratory Instructors ("Karmshala Anudeshak") in a Government Polytechnic run by a Committee of Management which is under grant in aid by the Government, namely, Kanahiya Lal Polytechnic, Roorkee, Haridwar. The petitioner alleges gross irregularities and violation of law while making the selection and the consequent appointments to the post of "Laboratory Instructors". The counter affidavit in this case has been filed by the State, the Committee of Management as well as the private respondents.

(2.) ARGUMENTS were heard of Mr. Sharad Sharma, Senior Advocate assisted by Ms. Indu Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner, Mr. N.P. Sah, Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand, Mr. Arvind Vashisth, Advocate for respondent nos. 3 and 4 and Mr. L.P. Naithani and Mr. V.K. Kohli, Senior Advocates assisted by Mr. Siddharth Singh and Mr. I.P. Kohli, Advocates for the private respondents. The main contention of the petitioner is that an advertisement was issued on 4.2.2004 in "Dainik Jagran" newspaper stating that, inter alia, seven posts of Laboratory Instructors are vacant in Kanahiya Lal Polytechnic, Roorkee (Uttaranchal) for which eligible candidates may apply. The petitioner had applied for the said post having all the required eligibility for the said post. In all, there were seven different posts of Laboratory Instructors of different trade, such as, sheet metal shop, machine shop, carpentry shop, fitting, welding, foundry as well as wiring and jointing. There was a clear stipulated condition in the advertisement that in case a candidate wants to apply for more than one post of Laboratory Instructor then a separate application is liable to be made by him. The petitioner further contends that a meeting was held of the Search Committee of the said institute on 11.6.2004 and the Committee resolved that the selection has to take place in accordance with Government Order dated 18.12.1999. The main contention of the petitioner is that the procedure in the Government Order dated 18.12.1999 prescribes that marks will be awarded to a candidate in selection process as per the following :

(8.) A bare reading of Regulation 14 would show that reliance on it by the respondent institute and private respondents is misplaced, inasmuch as the post of Laboratory Instructor does not appear to be a teaching post, either from the Regulations or the schedule attached to it. Apart from the bare perusal of the above Regulations, the fact that the Search Committee in its meeting dated 11.6.2004 had clearly held that while making selection it will follow the Government Order dated 18.12.1999 further shows that the appointments were to be given for "non -teaching posts", as it is for a "non -teaching post". The teaching posts are that of Principals, Lecturers, etc. The aforesaid Government order dated 18.12.1999 is a part of the writ petition (Annexure no. 9 to the writ petition). The said order is from the Secretary, Government of Uttarakhand, Technical Education, Kanpur, Uttar Pradesh stating that the lab instructors or laboratory instructors and computer programmers are to be selected as per their technical qualification, experience and interview, and the marks have to be given against each head, as already referred above. Hence, the procedure had already been laid down for selection of Laboratory Instructors and they had to be followed as per the standards and norms set in the Government Order dated 18.12.1999.