DR. BALDEV SINGH Vs. KURUKSHETRA UNIVERSITY, KURUKSHETRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner who is working as Dean of Colleges, Kurukshetra University has filed this petition under Articles 226 of the Constitution challenging the non-renewal of his term for another three years.

(2.) By an advertisement issued in early 1987, the Kurukshetra University, Kurukshetra (for short the University) invited applications for the post of Dean of Colleges which was to be filled up on tenure basis for three years extendable for another term of three years but not beyond the age of 65 years. Petitioner alongwith some other candidates applied for the post. A Selection Committee was constituted which interviewed the applicants including the petitioner. The Committee as per its report dated July 14, 1988 recommended the petitioner alongwith another for this post. The petitioner was placed at serial No. 1. The Executive Council of the University which is the competent authority to appoint Dean of Colleges, in its meeting held on July 27, 1988 considered the recommendations of the Selection Committee and approved the same. Thereafter, the Registrar of the University issued to the petitioner a letter of appointment dated July 20, 1988. Clauses 2 and 3 of this letter which are relevant read as under :

(3.) The petitioner joined his new post on Aug. 1, 1988. Since the appointment of the petitioner was on tenure basis, the condition of notice period as laid down in Clause 3 of the appointment letter was deleted. It may be mentioned that before joining the present assignment, the petitioner was working as Professor of Sanskrit in the Himachal Pradesh University, Shimla and had also been head of the Sanskrit department of that University. His date of birth is June 15, 1929 and was about to superannuate when he was appointed by the University in July 1988. The term of three years for which the petitioner was initially appointed was to expire on July 31, 1991 and his date of birth being June 15, 1929, he was to attain the age of the 65 years on June 15, 1994. For this reason the University did not give him another term of three years as it would have gone beyond the age of 65 years. The matter regarding grant of extension in the term of appointment of the petitioner was considered by the Executive Council of the University in its meeting held on July 22, 1991 and after considering the agenda note which contained the details of his appointment, the Council took the following decision:-