SHANTA PAUL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition filed as a public interest litigation seeks for a declaration to declare the appointment of the 6th respondent, the Registrar of Kazi Nazrul University as non-est/nullity, as it is based on erroneous advertisement which is not in conformity with the University Grants Commission Regulations, 2018 in short (UGC Regulations). The petitioner also prays for issuance of a writ of quo warranto to call upon the 6th respondent to show cause as to why he should not be ousted from the public office on declaring his appointment dtd. 1/2/2023 as Registrar of the said university being illegal.

(2.) Mr. Chakraborty, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submitted that the appointment of the 6th respondent as the Registrar of the University is illegal as it is based on false details of employment experience furnished by the 6th respondent; the employment advertisement issued by the university is not in conformity with the UGC Regulations; and erroneous advertisement would not create a right in favour of an applicant who acts on such representation; the AICTE Regulations, 2010 and the earlier clarification issued in 2003 is binding upon private institutions run with the approval of the AICTE and the UGC Regulations and the AICTE notification which prescribed minimum essential qualification and length of service for promotion to higher post has a force of a statute. It is submitted that as per the notification dtd. 2/11/2017 (adopted in 2018 by UGC) a candidate is eligible to apply for the post of Registrar who has at least 15 years of experience as Assistant Professor in academic Level 11 and above or with the 8 years of service in academic Level 12 and the above and including Associate Professor along with experience in educational administration or comparable experience in research establishment and/or other institutions of higher education or 15 years of administrative experience of which 8 years shall be as Deputy Registrar or an equivalent post. It is further submitted that the 6th respondent furnished false details of employment as he neither reached academic Level 11 with rationalized entry pay of Rs.68,900.00 nor did he reach academic Level 12 with rationalized entry pay of Rs.78,800.00 as per the notification for Scheme of Revisions of Pay of Teachers and Equivalent Cadre in Universities and Colleges dtd. 2/11/2017. It is further submitted that the advertisement issued by the respondent university for appointment to the post of Registrar is not in conformity with the notification issued by the Government of India dtd. 2/11/2017 adopted by the UGC vide notification dtd. 18/6/2018 and the appointment of the 6th respondent arising out of an erroneous advertisement is unsustainable. It is further submitted that the length of service required for promotion to the post of Lecturer (Senior Scale) from the post of Lecturer and from Senior Lecturer to the post of Assistant Professor and from Assistant Professor to the post of Professor as per the AICTE Notification 2003 and 2010 and UGC Regulations is mandatory and no private institution or college or university can promote any appointee to the higher post in violation of the AICTE notification and UGC Regulation. It is further submitted that an earlier writ petition was filed in WPA (P) 223 of 2023 challenging the appointment of the 6th respondent as the Registrar of the University. However, the said writ petition was dismissed in which the effect of the AICTE notification and UGC Regulations were not considered and therefore the petitioner is entitled to canvass such grounds in this writ petition. It is further submitted that the 6th respondent is not qualified to apply for the post of Registrar as he has made a wrong claim with regard to the details of employment experience as mentioned in his e-application. It is further submitted that as could be seen from the said application, the 6th respondent did not serve 15 years as Assistant Professor in academic Level 11 and above or with 8 years of service in academic Level 12 and above.

(3.) The learned Advocate for the petitioner referred to the notification dtd. 2/11/2017 wherein the minimum qualification for the post of Registrar has been mentioned. It is further submitted that the 6th respondent belongs to Level 10 in 2017 and he will not come under academic Level 11 or academic Level 12 as per the said notification unless he fulfills the conditions for promotion prescribed in the AICTE Regulations issued during 1999 and 2003. It is further submitted that the private institutions cannot make any rules of its own concerning appointment of teachers, scale of pay and length of service in specific pay band and if there is any violation, the AICTE is entitled to withhold or discontinue grants in respect of courses, or programmes to such technical institutions which fails to comply with the directions of AICTE within the stipulated period of time and take such other steps as may be necessary for ensuring the compliance of the direction of the Council. Therefore it is submitted that an erroneous advertisement issued by the University will not survive or create any right in favour of the applicant and that in terms of the UGC Regulations, 2017, the 6th respondent is not eligible to hold the post of Registrar as he has no experience of 15 years as Assistant Professor in academic Level 11 and above or with 8 years of service in academic Level 12 and above including as Associate Professor along with the experience in educational administration. Therefore it is submitted that the respondent university or the state can enhance the qualifications, more than what is prescribed by the AICTE or UGC but cannot dilute the conditions stipulated by the AICTE/UGC.