C RANGAPPA Vs. REGISTRAR PADMAVATHI MAHILA VISWAVIDYALAYAM TIRUPATHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Writ Petitions No.10037 of 1993, 4464 of 1994 and 10822 of 1994 relate to filling up the vacancy of Deputy Registrar earmarked for Scheduled Caste candidate pursuant to the notification given by the respondent-University on 9-9-1991. While Writ Petition No. 10037 of 1993 was filed by Mr. Rangappa, seeking a direction to the respondent University to appoint him as Deputy Registrar, WP No.4464 of 1994 was filed by Mr. Krishnam Raju, 2nd respondent in the above writ petition, questioning the very process of selection while Smt. Rajya Lakshmi filed Writ Petition No. 10822 of 1994 seeking a direction to appoint her as Deputy Registrar.

(2.) At the outset, I would like to refer the oft quoted maxim "if you want to kill a dog, call it mad and shoot at it". The case on hand is of that nature. This is neither a solitary instance nor it has happened in this University for the first time. It is a universal feature and no institution is an exception to this phenomena. As long as Merit of an individual has to be judged on the subjective satisfaction of the person sitting in the chair, we cannot expect a better deal to the persons who cannot pull the strings of the administration.

(3.) The prevailing situation in the country was beautifully summed up by Justice K. Ramaswamy as he then was in Delhi Transport Corporation v. DTC Mazdoor Congress & others, AIR 1991 SC 101 while considering the vires of Regulation 9(b) of Delhi Transport Corporation which confers powers on the authority to terminate the services of a permanent and confirmed employee by issuing a notice without assigning any reason in the order and without giving any opportunity to hear the employee before passing the impugned order, considered the effect of termination of service and held as hereundcr: