BASABI BHATTACHARYA Vs. JADAVPUR UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Jadavpur University issued an advertisement being its Employment Notification No.A/2/C/7/2002 inviting application for appointment to various teaching posts including the post of Professor of Applied Economics (Financial Economics) at serial No.1(b) (hereinafter referred to as the 'disputed post'). For the disputed post prescribed essential and desirable qualifications were : Qualification Essential: For the posts of Sl. No.1(b) to 1(d). An eminent scholar with published work of high quality actively engaged in research with 10 years' of experience in post-Graduate teaching and/or research at the University/National level Institutions, including experience of guiding research at doctoral level. OR An outstanding scholar with established reputation who has made significant contribution to knowledge. For the post of Applied Economics Post Graduate degree in Economics or related relevant disciplines. Desirable: For the post of Sl. No.1(b) Proven ability to teach Economics Theory, relevant to Financial Economics at the PG Level and conduct research in Financial Economics. Specialisation : For the post of Sl. No.1(b). Applied Economics (Financial Economics).

(2.) In response to the said Employment Notice the writ petitioner Dr. Basabi Bhattacharya, a Rader in the Department of Economics, Jadavpur University, and respondent No.4, Dr. Anajan Chakraborty, a Reader in the Department of Economics of Calcutta University, among others, applied for the disputed post. The Selection Committee constituted for the disputed post in its meeting held on April 8, 2003 recommended the names of the respondent No.4 and the writ petitioner placing respondent No.4 at Serial No.1 and the writ petitioner at Serial No.2 in order of preference. The said recommendation of the Selection Committee was sent to the Executive Council of the Jadavpur University (hereinafter referred to as 'the University') for acceptance. Against such selection of the respondent No.4 the writ petitioner submitted a representation to the Chancellor of the University complaining that the respondent No.4 was not eligible to be considered. The said representation was sent to the Executive Council by the Chancellor for consideration. Before placing the said representation before the Executive Council the Vice-Chancellor referred the same to the Dean of the Faculty of Arts. The Dean sent a reply that the Selection Committee regarded the respondent No.4 as an outstanding scholar and selected him although he did not have the required teaching experience. The Executive Council in its meeting held on April 16, 2003 accepted the recommendation of the Selection Committee for appointment to the disputed post. In this writ petition the writ petitioner has challenged the said selection for the disputed post of Professor.

(3.) Dr. Basabi Bhattacharya, the writ petitioner has pointed out that Dr. Anjan Chakravorty, the respondent No.4 did not have the requisite teaching experience and was not eligible to be considered for the disputed post. Admittedly, Dr. Chakravorty had only seven years' teaching experience in the University and minimum experience required for the disputed post was ten years' experience in Post-Graduate teaching including experience of guiding research at doctoral level. However, an outstanding scholar with established reputation who made a significant contribution to knowledge was also entitled to be considered and no minimum experience was prescribed for such an outstanding scholar.