RAMAVILAS SPINNING AND WEAVING MILLS (P) LTD REP BY ITS MANAGUNG DIRECTOR L. RAMAKRISHNAN Vs. VIRUDHUNAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned single Judge dated 6.7.2010 made in W.P.(MD)No.5057 of 2010, wherein the learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition praying to declare the entry of Column No.3 for Column 1 of Category 2 of Class 2 of the Table under sub-rule (b) of Rule 4 of the Special Rules for Tamil Nadu Legal Educational Service and the consequential notification issued by the 5th respondent dated 30.3.2010 calling for applications for direct recruitment of Lecturers (Senior Scale)/Lecturers Senior Scale (pre-law) for Government Law Colleges (2007-2008, 2009-2010) in respect of the selection and appointment of Lecturers (Senior Scale) as illegal.

(2.) THE learned single Judge dismissed the writ petition following the earlier order passed in W.P.(MD)No.8191 of 2010 dated 21.4.2010, which was confirmed in W.A.(MD)No.1071 of 2010 dated 14.6.2010.

(3.) IT is stated in the regulation that in respect of the subjects viz., Humanities, Social Sciences, Commerce Education, Foreign Languages and Law, passing of eligibility test is made mandatory, even for candidates having PhD degree. However, the candidates who have completed M.Phil degree or have submitted PhD thesis in the concerned subject upto 31st December, 1993 were given exemptions from appearing in the NET examination. IT is contended in the affidavit that the said regulation provides for relaxation, if in any subject NET is not being conducted or enough number of candidates are not available with NET qualification for a specified period only. IT is the contention of the appellants that the said UGC regulation cannot be made applicable to the Law College Lecturers as already qualifications are prescribed under Section 7(1)(h) of the Advocates Act, 1961 as well as Rule 15 of the Bar Council of India Rules, 1975. IT is also the contention of the appellants that even if the regulations of the UGC is applicable, in the impugned amendment to the rules issued by the State Government, no provision is available for approaching the UGC for the grant of relaxation in case of non availability of sufficient number of candidates and therefore the impugned amendment is to be declared as invalid and the consequential notification has to be declared as invalid.