# Dr. Fazal Ur.-Rehman v. Vice Chancellor, A.M.U., Aligarh & Ors

- **Citation:** (2014) 2 ILRA 771
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2014-01-09
- **Case number:** Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 49764 of 2013
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/dr-fazal-ur-rehman-v-vice-chancellor-a-m-u-aligarh-ors-42973
- **Pages:** 4

## Headnote

Constitution of India, Art.-14, 16-Reduction
of minimum eligibility qualification-vacancy
of
Associate
Professor
advertised
on
06.02.2013-with requirement of 5 year
teaching experience after last date of
submission of application-on shortlistingpetitioner
not
called
for
interview-on
25.03.2012 the V.C. Exercising emergency
power u/s 19(3) of A.M.U. Act reduced
teaching experience with 4 years-which
resulted selected of Respondent 6 and
other desiring candidate-held-such action
violate of Art. 14 and 16 of the constitutiondepriving other similarly situated candidate
to participate in selection-entire selection
proceeding quashed.

Held: Para-12
We further find that if a candidate like
respondent no.6, who had less then five
years teaching experience and did not
satisfy the requirements mentioned in
the advertisement had to consider than
last
expected
from
Aligarh
Muslim
University
to
have
published
a
corrigendum or a fresh advertisement so
that all other candidates with four years
teaching experience like respondent no.6
772 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
may submit their application. It is not
open to the Aligarh Muslim University to
have reduce the requirements of five
years teaching experience contrary to
the terms of the advertisement only in
respect of respondent no.6 and Tanvir
Ahmad.

Case Law discussed:
(1994) 2 SCC 723

## Text

2 All] Dr. Fazal Ur.-Rehman Vs. Vice Chancellor, A.M.U., Aligarh & Ors.
771
U.P. and others (Supra) has held that
approval by the District Inspector of Schools
is not required before the selection and it is
only
required
before
making
the
appointment. In the present case, the
appointment of the petitioner has been made
on 02.01.2001 by the Principal of the college
after the resolution of the committee of
management dated 02.01.2001, without
taking prior approval from the District
Inspector of Schools, Deoria contrary to the
procedure provided under Regulation 101.
After making the appointment on 02.01.2001
the necessary papers have been sent on
06.01.2001 to the District Inspector of
Schools, Deoria for approval of the
appointment of the petitioner. The District
Inspector of Schools, Deoria was only
concerned with the appointment made on
02.01.2001. Since the approval has been
sought after making the appointment, the
District Inspector of Schools, Deoria has
declined to grant the approval as the
appointment was contrary to the procedure
provided under Regulation 101.

9. I do not find any error in the
impugned
order
passed
by
District
Inspector
of
Schools,
Deoria.
The
appointment has been made by the
Principal of the college, appointing the
petitioner without prior approval, therefore
the appointment was ex-facie illegal being
contrary to Regulation 101 and, therefore,
the District Inspector of Schools, Deoria
has rightly refused to grant the approval.
The decision of the Division Bench of this
Court in the case of Jagdish Singh, etc. Vs.
State of U.P. and others (Supra) is of no
help to the petitioner.

10. In view of the above, the writ
petition
fails
and,
is
accordingly,
dismissed.
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 09.01.2014

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE ARUN TANDON, J.
THE HON'BLE SURYA PRAKASH
KESARWANI, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 49764 of 2013

Dr. Fazal Ur.-Rehman ...Petitioner
Versus
Vice Chancellor, A.M.U., Aligarh & Ors.
 ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Mohd Saeed Siddiqui, Sri Irshad Ali

Counsel for the Respondents:
Sri Shashank Shekhar Singh, Sri M.F.
Ansari

Constitution of India, Art.-14, 16-Reduction
of minimum eligibility qualification-vacancy
of
Associate
Professor
advertised
on
06.02.2013-with requirement of 5 year
teaching experience after last date of
submission of application-on shortlistingpetitioner
not
called
for
interview-on
25.03.2012 the V.C. Exercising emergency
power u/s 19(3) of A.M.U. Act reduced
teaching experience with 4 years-which
resulted selected of Respondent 6 and
other desiring candidate-held-such action
violate of Art. 14 and 16 of the constitutiondepriving other similarly situated candidate
to participate in selection-entire selection
proceeding quashed.

Held: Para-12
We further find that if a candidate like
respondent no.6, who had less then five
years teaching experience and did not
satisfy the requirements mentioned in
the advertisement had to consider than
last
expected
from
Aligarh
Muslim
University
to
have
published
a
corrigendum or a fresh advertisement so
that all other candidates with four years
teaching experience like respondent no.6
772 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
may submit their application. It is not
open to the Aligarh Muslim University to
have reduce the requirements of five
years teaching experience contrary to
the terms of the advertisement only in
respect of respondent no.6 and Tanvir
Ahmad.

Case Law discussed:
(1994) 2 SCC 723

(Delivered by Hon'ble Arun Tandon, J.)

1. We have heard Sri Irshad Ali,
learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri
Shashank Shekhar Singh, learned counsel
on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 5 and Sri
M.F. Ansari, learned counsel on behalf of
respondent No. 6.

2. Aligarh Muslim University
published advertisement No.1 of 2013,
dated 6.2.3013 for the post of Associate
Professor in subject of Anatomy. The
petitioner as well as the respondent no.6
applied in pursuance to the advertisement.
It was specifically mentioned in the
advertisement
that
Assistant
Professor/Lecturer
having
teaching
experience of five years, would be
eligible to apply. The last date for the
submission
of
the
application
was
5.3.2013.
The
cut
off
date
for
determination of the eligibility condition
was provided as the last date of
submission of the application form. The
applications received were scrutinized and
only
three
candidates
namely,
the
petitioner, Dr. Farhan Kirmani and Dr.
Nema Usman were found eligible for
being called for interview and they alone
fulfilled
the
minimum
teaching
experience of five years in terms of the
advertisement.

3. From the record it appears that the
respondent no.6, who was not short listed
for want of requisite five years teaching
experience
submitted
an
application
before the Vice Chancellor. In the
application it was stated that the petitioner
may be provided relaxation from five
years teaching experience. He also filed
another application wherein it was stated
that under the amended M.C.I. guidelines
only four years teaching experience is
required. The Vice Chancellor asked for
the legal opinion and is exercising the
emergency powers under Section 19 (3)
of Aligarh Muslim University Act, 1920
vide order dated 25.3.2012 adapted the
amendment
notification
issued
by
Medical Council of India, whereby the
minimum teaching experience for the post
of Associate Professor stood reduced
from five years to four years.

4. With the adaptation of the
amendment in the teaching experience the
selection committee proceeded to include
the name of respondent no.6 and one
Tanvir Ahmad for the purposes of
interview. After interview the respondent
no.6 along with Tanvir Ahmad, who was
also had teaching experience of four years
has been selected for appointment on the
post of Assistant Professor. The selection
has
been
notified
on
27.6.
2013
(Annexure-11 to the writ petition ). It is
against this selection that the present writ
petition has been filed.

5. On behalf of the petitioner it is
contended that from the records it is
admitted that on the date of advertisement
published i.e., 6.2.2013 as well as on the
last date of the submission of the
application i.e., 5.3.2013, admittedly, the
relevant Ordinances of the Aligarh
Muslim University provided that the
minimum teaching experience required
for the post of Associate Professor, would
2 All] Dr. Fazal Ur.-Rehman Vs. Vice Chancellor, A.M.U., Aligarh & Ors.
773
five
years
as
Lecturer/Associate
Professor. It is with reference to these
statutory provision that on the selection
for the said post had to be completed.
Even if the Vice Chancellor exercised his
emergency power under section 19(3) of
the Aligarh Muslim University Act, 1920
for the purposes of adapting the amended
notification of Medical Council of India
to be precise on 25.2.2013 the same
would be perspective in nature and shall
not effect the proceedings of selection
under the advertisement in question. It is
further stated that if by adaptaion of the
amended provisions of the Medical
Council of India the requirement of
teaching experience stood reduced to 4
years and the University decided to
consider the candidates with four years
teaching experience as qualified for the
post of Lecturer/Associate Professor than
the minimum required was to publish a
corrigendum disclosing the minimum
teaching experience as four years, so that
inasmuch as all such candidates, who
could apply may have an opportunity to
participate in the selection from Back
door of respondent no.6 and Tanvir
Ahmad by adaptation of the amended
Medical Science of India Regulation
under notification dated 25.3.2013.

6.

Learned
counsel
for
the
University could not refer to any statutory
provisions contrary to the minimum
experience, which was notified in the
advertisement applicable on the relevant
date. He could not dispute the fact that if
persons
with
four
years
teaching
experience were to be treated as eligible
then besides respondent no.6 and Tanvir
Ahmad, there may be other similarly
situate persons duly qualified for being
considered for the post of Associate
Professor who did not apply because of
minimum five years teaching experience
being required as essential conditions in
the advertisement.

7. So far as Dr. Farha Ghaus,
respondent no.6 is concerned, she submits
that
once
the
petitioner
has
been
considered in the process of selection and
has not been selected in preference to the
respondent no.6, his writ petition may not
be entertained.

8. We have heard the learned
counsel for the parites and examined the
records.

9. It is not in dispute that in the
advertisement for the post of Associate
Professor, the Aligarh Muslim University
has
specifically
provided
that
the
candidate must have five years teaching
experience
as
a
Lecturer/Associate
Professor. It is also not in dispute that the
petitioner satisfies the said requirement. It
is also not in dispute that the petitioner
was sort listed for interview being
possessed the prescribed qualifications as
per advertisement along with two others,
while the respondent no.6 was not sort
listed as he was not possessed of the
prescribed minimum qualification.

10. It is only after the Vice
Chancellor
of
the
Aligarh
Muslim
University decided to exercise with
emergency process under section 19(3) of
the Aligarh Muslim University Act, 1920
for adapting the amended notification of
the
Medical
Council
of
India
on
25.3.2013 for the essential teaching
experience required for the post of
Associate Professor, being reduced from
five to four years that respondent no.6 has
been short listed. Such emergency power
by the Vice Chancellor and adaptation of
774 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
the amended notification by the Aligarh
Muslim University for the purposes of
reducing the teaching experience from
five years to four years would be
perspective in nature and will not
adversely affect the selection proceedings
which
had
been
initiated
under
advertisement No.1 of 2013.

11. The last date for making of the
application was 5.3.2013. The eligibility of
the candidates has to be seen with reference
to the provisions as applicable and with
reference to the condition mentioned in the
advertisement, on the last date of making of
the application as has been laid down by the
Apex Court in the case of U.P. Public
Service Commission,U.P., Allahabad and
another Vs. Alpana (1994) 2 SCC-723.

12. We further find that if a candidate
like respondent no.6, who had less then five
years teaching experience and did not satisfy
the
requirements
mentioned
in
the
advertisement had to consider than last
expected from Aligarh Muslim University to
have published a corrigendum or a fresh
advertisement so that all other candidates
with four years teaching experience like
respondent
no.6
may
submit
their
application. It is not open to the Aligarh
Muslim University to have reduce the
requirements
of
five
years
teaching
experience contrary to the terms of the
advertisement only in respect of respondent
no.6 and Tanvir Ahmad.

13. Such experience undertaken by the
Aligarh Muslim University runs contrary to
Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of
India, inasmuch as similarly situate persons
like respondent no.6 have been denied the
opportunity to participate in the process of
selection because of the condition mentioned
in the advertisement published qua five years
teaching experience as Lecturer/Associate
Professor being mandatory for making of the
application for the post of Associate
Professor.

14. We may clarify that the
qualifications provided under the guidelines
of the Medical Council of India only lay
down minimum standards for the post of
Lecturer/Associate Professor and it is always
open to a University to prescribe higher
qualification and if any advertisement in this
regard is published, it cannot be said to be in
violation of the guidelines of the Medical
Council of India.

15. So far as the objection raised on
behalf of the respondent no.6 qua petitioner
being not entitled to challenge the selection
process having participated in the same does
not appeal to us in the facts of this case. The
consideration of the case of respondent no.6
after reduction of the required experience is
found to be in violation of Article 14 and 16
of the Constitution.

16.

We
quash the
selection
proceedings including the select panel
dated 27.6.2013. The Aligarh Muslim
University may proceed with selections in
accordance with law. The writ petition is
allowed.
--------
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 07.03.2014

BEFORE
THE HON'BLE TARUN AGARWALA, J.
THE HON'BLE RAJAN ROY, J.

Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 50601 of 2007

M/S Deepak Kumar Agarwal ...Petitioner
Versus
Nagar Palika Parishad & Anr. Respondents