CHANDRABHAN SACHAN Vs. JAWAHARLAL NEHRU KRISHI VISHWAVIDYALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the petitioner, a Research Associate, posted at College of Agriculture, Gwalior, a constituent college of Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwavidyalaya, Jabalpur, seeks a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint the petitioner by way of regularisation on the post of Assistant Professor with effect from 3 -1 -1988 and also to pay the petitioner arrears of emoluments consisting of difference between those payable to the Research Associate and those to an Assistant Professor with effect from 25 -4 -1985, the date of appointment of the petitioner.

(2.) IN the year 1984 the respondents advertised certain posts of Research Associates and Assistant Professors. The petitioner applied for appointment as Research Associate. He was so appointed vide order dated 9 -4 -1985 (Annexure -P/3) on a consolidated stipendiary allowance of Rs. 1250/ - per month against the post of Assistant Professor/Junior Scientist and posted at the College of Agriculture at Gwalior. On 5 -9 -1987 the respondents invited applications for appointment to the posts of Assistant Professors and Junior Scientists in different faculties. The petitioner also applied for the same. However, he was not called for the interview which was fixed for 3 -1 -1989. He approached the respondents and made several representations complaining against his exclusion from interview but the representations made by the petitioner did not bring out any result.

(3.) THE case of the respondents, as set out in the return, is that the petitioner was appointed a Research Associate which carrieda merely stipendiary status and could not be termed a cadre or tenure post. Several statutes issued under Jawaharlal Nehru Krishi Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, lay down qualifications determining eligibility for various teaching posts including that of the Assistant Professor. Procedure and mode of appointment is also laid down. All these being statutory, are incapable of being relaxed. The petitioner had neither applied for the post of Assistant Professor nor was he appointed as such. He had sought for appointment on the post of Research Associate, which was given to him though for fiscal purposes the amount of stipend paid to the petitioner was drawn against the vacant lying post of Assistant Professor. No teaching work was taken from the petitioner and even if the petitioner had casually done anything amounting to teaching work that did not mean that the petitioner was performing teaching job expected of an Assistant Professor. In the year 1988 -89 the petitioner did apply for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor but he was lacking in essential eligibility qualifications and as such the Screening Committee constituted in terms of statute 6(b) having scrutinized the case of the petitioner did not approve him for being called for interview.