P RAJENDRAN Vs. BHARATHIYAR UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner, Dr.P.Rajendran, has filed this writ petition seeking writ of mandamus to call for the records pertaining to the impugned resolution No.53 passed by the 1st respondent, Syndicate of the University dated 12.01.2008, quash the same and direct the 1st respondent to make appointment in accordance with UGC Notification, 2000.

(2.) THE petitioner has passed Post Graduate in Commerce by securing 81% marks from the University of Madras and also passed MBA from the Department of Management Studies by securing 59.94% from Madura Kamaraj University, Madurai and also completed M.Phil. by securing 64.88% and Ph.D in 1995. With the above qualifications, he was appointed as Assistant Professor of Commerce in Rajus, College, Rajapalayam on 24.06.1984. After 1 = years, the petitioner joined in V.H.N.S.N. College, Virudhunagar and now has got 21 years and 10 months of continuous service with a designation as Reader in Commerce. Whileso, the 1st respondent, Bharathiyar University, Coimbatore, called for application for the post of Professor of Commerce and Professor-cum-Director of School of Management. In response to that advertisement, the petitioner also applied to both the posts and thereafter, the petitioner received a letter from the 1st respondent asking him to attend the interview for the post of Professor of Commerce alone, but not other posts. Subsequently, the petitioner came to know that the 3rd respondent was appointed as Professor of Commerce by the 1st respondent. THE petitioner, therefore, having seen that the 3rd respondent is not having the required qualification, has sent a letter dated 24.01.2008 to the 1st respondent to furnish the particulars of the selected candidate, members of selection committee and criteria for selection. Though the petitioner's application was received with an acknowledgment dated 25.01.2008, the particulars requested by the petitioner were not furnished. However, a copy of the Syndicate resolution was furnished to the petitioner by one of the Syndicate member. THErefore, the same is challenged by the petitioner by filing the present writ petition.

(3.) HEARD the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.