PALLABI KALITA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. P. Taffo, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A. Mannan, learned CGSC on behalf of respondent University and Mr. L. Tenzing, learned counsel on behalf of private respondent No. 4. None appears on behalf of private respondent No. 5.

(2.) Two unreserved posts of Lecturer in Zoology including other posts were sought to be filled up by the Rajiv Gandhi University (hereinafter referred to as R. G. U. in short), a Central University, Rono Hills, Itanagar, through Advertisement No. 2(A)/2007 dated 10.08.2007. Several candidates including the petitioner, in response to the aforesaid advertisement, applied for the post of Lecturer in Zoology. The petitioner and private respondents 4 and 5 were short-listed for interview to be held on 19.09.2008 and accordingly , they appeared in the interview with their testimonials and other documents but the result of the interview was not published by the Selection Board. However, the private respondent No. 4 was appointed against one of the posts of Lecturer in Fish & Fisheries subject while private respondent No. 5 was kept in the waiting list. The petitioner gathered the said information through an application made under Right to Information Act, 2005. The petitioner challenges the select list dated 19.09.2008 prepared by the Selection Board (Annexure-III to the writ petition) and the appointment of the private respondent No. 4 which was made on the basis of the said select list.

(3.) Mr. Taffo, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the Rajiv Gandhi University, Rono Hills, Itanagar, advertised for 2 (two) unreserved posts of Lecturer in Zoology Subject. Out of these two posts, one was meant for subject 'Fish & Fisheries' and the other for subject 'Entomology'. The petitioner has no grievance against the appointment made in the post of 'Entomology'. Her grievance is particularly against the appointment of private respondent No. 4 in the post meant for 'Fish & Fisheries' and also against placement of private respondent No. 5 in the waiting list. The private respondent No. 4, who did M. Sc. in Entomology and Ph. D. in Parasitology is not qualified to hold the post of Lecturer in 'Fish & Fisheries' under Zoology subject as per the specialization prescribed in the advertisement dated 10.08.2007. The petitioner, on the other hand, passed M. Sc. in Zoology (Fishery Biology) and Ph. D. in Fish & Fish Feeds (Nutritional Biochemistry) with Fishery Biology/Aquaculture and having proficiency in the said field of Fishery subject and is, therefore, more qualified and eligible for the post of Lecturer in 'Fish & Fisheries'. It is also submitted that the petitioner is well ahead of private respondent No. 5 in the academic career, experience and publication of high impact journals. The impugned selection list and the appointment made by the respondent authorities are, therefore, liable to be set aside and the petitioner should be appointed as Lecturer against the said post in place of private respondent No. 4.