ANIL KUMAR MATHUR Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two writ petition involve a common question as to the constitutionality of the explanation appended to Sub -sections (4) and (5) of Section 11 of the Rajasthan Universities' Teachers and Officers (Selection for Appointment) Act, 1984 (for short 'the Act').

(2.) I may state a few relevant facts of both cases. In S.B.Civil Writ petition No. 482/85 the petitioner was appointed Lecturer in Chemistry as a result of direct recruitment after direct selection. He was called for interview on August 24, 1968, and his name was recommended by the Selection Committee which was accepted by the Syndicate vide resolution No. 6 dated September 14, 1968. In the order of merit he was at No. 1. Annexure 2 is the report of the Selection Committee which shows that 11 names were recommended in the order of merit. Non -petitioners Nos. 3 to 8 were below the rank of the petitioner. Non -petitioner No. 3 Dr. A.M. Bhandari was at No. 7, non -petitioner No. 4 Dr. B.S. Sankhla was at No. 2, non -petitioner No. 5 Dr. R.K. Chauhan was at No. 4, non -petitioner No. 6 Dr. B.K. Tak was at No. 5, non -petitioner No. 7 Dr. O.P. Kachhawaha was at No. 6 and non -petitioner No. 8. Dr. K.C.K. Mathur was at No. 9. The Syndicate of the University also adopted the rule of seniority vide its resolution dated January 7, 1984 according to which seniority of persons appointed as a result of one and the same selection by open recruitment shall be in accordance with the merit determined by the Selection Committee irrespective of the date of joining.

(3.) IN the Writ Petition No. 362/1985 the petitioner Kailash Chandra Arora was appointed Lecturer in the Department of Structural Engineering in the Faculty of Engineering as a result of Selection Committee. In all, the Selection Committee recommended five names. The petitioner was shown at No. 2 whereas non -petitioner No. 3 was shown at No. 3 in order of merit. All along the petitioner was shown as senior to non -petitioner No. 3 as would be evident from Ex. 5. In connection with personal promotion from Lecturers to Readers, the petitioner's name was shown in the eligibility list Ex. 7 at No. 6 whereas the name of non -petitioner No. 3 was shown at No. 5, above the petitioner on the basis of date of joining. The petitioner joined on December 16, 1966 whereas non -petitioner No. 3. joined on 8 -12 -1965 before regular selection. In the final notification dated 11 -2 -1985 Ex. 10 after hearing the petitioner the same position was maintained and the non -petitioner No. 3 was shown above the petitioner.