Dr. R. Sanil v. Mahatma Gandhi University & Others

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** ## **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL** **MONDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 1ST CHAITHRA, 1943** ## **WP(C).No.16995 OF 2011(Y)** ## **PETITIONER:** **DR.R.SANIL, S/O RAVINDRANATHAN PILLAI PERUMBODATH HOUSE, KEDAMANGALAM,, NORTH PARUR, PIN: 683 513.** - **BY ADV. SHRI.SHANKAR V.** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM - 686560,, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.** - **2 VICE-CHANCELLOR AND CHAIRMAN SELECTION COMMITTEE OF PROFESSOR IN SCHOOL OF BIOSCIENCES, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM - 686560.** - **3 HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY.** - **4 PRO-CHANCELLOR MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001** - **5 G.J.RAY PROFESSOR IN SCHOOL OF BIO-SCIENCES, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM - 686560.** - **6 DR.M.S.LATHA, FORMER OF HOD OF SCHOOL OF BIO-SCIENCES AND MEMBER OF SELECTION COMMITTEE OF PROFESSOR IN SCHOOOL OF BIO-SCIENCES, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY,** **2** ## **WP(C).No.16995 OF 2011(Y)** **NOW WORKING AS PROFESSOR, IN SCHOOL OF BIOSCIENCES, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSINI HILLS P.O., KOTTAYAM 686560** **BY SRI.VARUGHESE M.EASO, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN BY SRI.ASOK M. CHERIAN, SC, M.G. UNIVERSITY** ## **GP SRI B HARISH KUMAR** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No.16995 OF 2011(Y)** **3** ## **JUDGMENT** ## **Dated this the 22nd day of March 2021** Petitioner in pursuance to the applications invited by the respondent Mahatma Gandhi University for filling up the post of Professors in School of Bio-Sciences in the pay scale of Rs.3740067000 + AGP on regular basis with subject of specialization in Life Science with specialization in Bio-Chemistry, had submitted an application Ext.P3 giving all the details. After having been issued a date of interview vide interview card dated 28.12.2010 (Ext.P4) the Selection Committee sat on 04.01.2011 whereby the petitioner and all other persons participated. In pursuance of the aforementioned selection process respondent No.5 has been selected vide appointment letter dated 20.01.2011 (Ext.P8) which has been challenged in the present writ petition _inter alia_ on the following submissions: 1) The respondents changed the selection criteria only at the time of convening of the meeting which is against the mandate of the Full Bench of this Court in _**Cyril Johnson v. State of Kerala**_ [2009 (4) KHC 404] wherein it has been categorically held that the selection committee **WP(C).No.16995 OF 2011(Y)** **4** has no jurisdiction to relax or vary the conditions as specified. In other words once the Rules of game have been set it cannot be changed. 2) Petitioner was the only candidate having the required qualification including the specialization. 3) Marks awarded to the 5[th] respondent in the selection process was arbitrary, biased and against the Rules of the selection. The criteria awarded in the interview was tailormade only to suit the 5[th] respondent. 4) Selection Committee did not award mark to the petitioner taking into consideration his credentials and therefore, the writ petition by quashing Ext.P8 should be allowed. 2. On the other hand, Sri.Ashok.M.Cheriyan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the University submitted that there is no proof or any document except the bald averments in the writ petition regarding the change of the Selection criteria which was only framed on 04.01.2011 in tandem with the UGC regulations and guidelines which have come into force with effect from 30.06.2010 whereas the notification inviting application was **WP(C).No.16995 OF 2011(Y)** **5** dated 28.07.2010. Ext.R5(a) is the sanction by the Registrar for applicability of UGC regulations 2010 and urged this Court for dismissal of the writ petition. 3. Sri.P.C.Sasidharan, learned counsel appearing for the 5[th] respondent reiterated the argument adopted by Sri.Ashok.M.Cheriyan. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and appraised the paper book and of the view that there is no force and merits in the submission of Sri.V.Shankar, learned counsel representing the petitioner. Invitation of applications vide Ext.P1 dated 28.07.2020, submitted by all the candidates including the petitioner and issuance of interview call are not in dispute. The question which is to be decided by this Court is whether there was any change/relaxation or variation of selection by the Selection Committee or not. There is no such material on record that the criteria fixed by the Selection Committee was deviated. If otherwise, there would have been a force as per dictum laid down in the judgment cited supr. It is settled law that a person who has participated in the selection process cannot turn around in laying challenge to the Selection procedure in view of the law **WP(C).No.16995 OF 2011(Y)** **6** laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in _**D.Sarojakumari** v._ _**R.Helen Thilakom and Others**_ [2017 (9) SCC 478]. If at all the petitioner had grievance challenge could have been laid earlier but not thereafter. It is an act of disgruntlement not supported by any material for making out the case of some arbitrariness or the law laid down in the judgment referred above. No ground for interference is made out, writ petition is dismissed. ## **Sd/-** **AMIT RAWAL JUDGE** nak **WP(C).No.16995 OF 2011(Y)** **7** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** - **EXHIBIT P1** **TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.AD.AII(1)/550/2010 DATED 28.07.2010 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY** - **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO.AD.AII(1)/550/2009 DATED 18.08.2009 AND CORRIGENDUM DATED 12.09.2009 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION ALONG WITH ALL SUPPORTIN DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN PURSUANCE TO EXHIBIT P1 NOTIFICATION** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE INTERVIEW CARD DATED 28.12.2010 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE CREENING COMMITTEE HELD ON 10.12.2010 OBTAINED UNDER RTI ACT ON 25.05.2011** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE NORMS AND CRITERIA FRAMED BY THE SELECTION COMMITTEE ON 04.01.2011 FOR THE SELECTION OF PROFESSOR IN SCHOOL OF BIO SCIENCES OF THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE INDEX CARD AWARDING OF MARKS IN THE INTERVIEW DATED 04.01.2011 PREPARED BY THE SELECTION COMMITTEE OBTAINED UNDER RTI ACT.** **EXHIBIT P7** - **TRUE COPY OF THE APPOINT ORDER NO.AD. AII (1)/550/2009 DATED 20.01.2011 ISSUED TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT BY THE RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY** **RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT R5 A** **TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE** **WP(C).No.16995 OF 2011(Y)** **8** **UNIVERSITY DATED 31/07/2010** **EXHIBIT R5B TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY DATED 3/12/2010** **EXHIBIT R5C TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY IN THIS REGARD DATED 1/9/2011 EXHIBIT R5D TRUE COPY OF THE CORRECT VERSION OF EXHIBIT P10 AND THIS DEPONENT MAY BE PERMITTED TO PRODUCE THE CORRECT ONE** **EXHIBIT R5E TRUE COPY OF ELIGIBLITY CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY EXHIBIT R15F TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE MADE BY THE MOSCOW STATE UNIVERSITY**