Gokul I. v Union of India & Ors.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** **PRESENT:** **THE HONOURABLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.HRISHIKESH ROY** **& THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR** **MONDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 25TH ASHADHA, 1940** **WP(C).No. 16075 of 2018** ## **PETITIONER(S)** **GOKUL I., AGED 23 YEARS, S/O. VENUGOPALAN, PUTHUR PADINJATTAYIL,PAROTHUMNEER, PRAPOYIL P.O, CHERUPUZHA VIA, PIN-670 511, KANNUR DISTRICT.** **BY ADVS.SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.)** ## **RESPONDENT(S):** ## **1. UNION OF INDIA,** **REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, SHASTRI BHAVAN, (2) JEEVAN DEEP BUILDING, PARLIAMENT STREET, WEST BLOCK-1, R.K PURAM, NEW DELHI- 110 001.** **2. THE CHAIRMAN, UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION, BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG, NEW DELHI- 110 002.** **3. CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, THE JASWINI HILLS, PERIYA P.O, KASARGOD- 671 316, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.** **4. DR. G. GOPAKUMAR, VICE CHANCELLOR, CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, TEJASWINI HILLS, PERIYE P.O, KASARGOD- 671 316.** **5. DR. K. JAYAPRASAD, PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS, SCHOOL OF GLOBAL STUDIES, MEMBER EXECUTIVE COUNCIL, DEAN, SCHOOL OF CULTURAL STUDIES (DSCS), CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, TEJASWINI HILLS, PERIYE P.O, KASARGOD-671 316.** **WP(C).No. 16075 of 2018** ## **6. STATE OF KERALA,** **REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.T.V.VINU, CGC R3 BY ADV. SRI.V.SAJITH KUMAR, SC, CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF KERALA R BY SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, CGC BY SRI.N.NAGARESH, ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.TEK CHAND** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** **WP(C).No. 16075 of 2018** ## **APPENDIX** ## **PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS** - **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO. 1/13 DATED 18-02-2013 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION NO. 2/13 DATED 18-2-2013 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 6-8-2014.** - **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE RELIEVING ORDER DATED 7/8/2014 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT FROM SREE NARAYANA COLLEGE, KOLLAM.** - **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 5/1/2015 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT** - **EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 11/2/2015 OF THE** - **5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE SUGGESTION PLACED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT BY THE REGISTRAR.** **EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE RE-NOTIFICATION DATED 13/2/2015.** - **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE ACADEMIC COUNSEL HELD ON 24-3-2015.** - **EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF THE 2ND EXECUTIVE COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON 27-3-2015.** - **EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION SUPPLIED BY THE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT UNIVERSITY** - **EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16/10/2015 OF THE 6TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE RELIEVING ORDER DATED 3/11/2015 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT** - **EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE RELIEVING ORDER DATED 9-11-2015 ISSUED BY THE SREE NARAYANA COLLEGE, KOLLAM.** - **EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 11-11-2015 SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE AUDIT REPORT FOR THE PERIOD FROM 1-4-2016 TO 31-3-2017 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE MINUTES OF THE 4TH MEETING OF EXECUTIVE COUNCIL HELD** ## **WP(C).No. 16075 of 2018** **ON 21-04-2017.** **EXHIBIT P18 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DATED 13/2/2018 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF JAMMU.** **EXHIBIT P19 TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF CANDIDATES DATED 25-4-2017 ISSUED BY CENTRAL UNIVERSITY OF TAMILNADU.** **EXHIBIT P 20 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 25.02.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE VARIOUS STATUTORY AUTHORITIES** **EXHIBIT P21 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 9.4.2018 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL VIGILANCE COMMISSIONER** **EXHIBIT P22 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT DATED 13.4.2018 ISSUED BY THE U.G.C** **EXHIBIT P23 TRUE COPY OF THE MINUTES OF 6TH MEETING OF 2ND EXECUTIVE COUNCIL OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 25.04.2014** **EXHIBIT P24 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 7.5.2015 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT** **EXHIBIT P25 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 4.9.2015 OF THE U.G.C** **EXHIBIT P26 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED 23.11.2015 SUBMITTED BY THE JITHA S.R., TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT** **EXHIBIT P27 TRUE COPY OF THE GOOGLE SCHOLAR CITATIONS OF 5TH RESPONDENT** **EXHIBIT P28 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.5.2017 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT** **RESPONDENTS EXHIBIT:** **EXHIBIT R3(A)- A TRUE COPY OF THE SCORE SHEET WITH RESPECT TO DR.K.JAYAPRASAD** **//TRUE COPY//** **P.A TO JUDGE** ## **HRISHIKESH ROY, Ag.C.J. & A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.** **- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 16075 of 2018 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 16[th] day of July, 2018** ## **J U D G M E N T** ## **Hrishikesh Roy, Ag.C.J.** Heard Sri.S.Sreekumar, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner. The learned Standing counsel for the Central University of Kerala Sri.V.Sajith Kumar is present. Sri.Tek Chand, the learned Government Pleader is appearing for the State Government. 2. Claiming to be a social worker fighting corruption, the petitioner has filed this Public Interest Litigation (PIL) to challenge the appointment of the Dr.K.Jayaprassad, as a Professor in the Department of International Relations, School of Global studies in the Central University of Kerala. The focus of the challenge is that the 5[th] respondent did not satisfy the eligibility criterion for appointment to the lower post of Associate Professor, which he joined on 11.11.2015 and on that basis, his further promotion as Professor is projected to be vitiated. Thus the writ of quo warranto, to interfere with the continuation of the 5[th] respondent in the post he is holding, is prayed in this PIL. 3. When the question of maintainability of a PIL in respect of the eligibility of the 5[th] respondent to hold the post of Professor, was raised, the learned Senior Counsel has referred to Hari Bansh Lal v. Sahodar Prasad Mahto and Others [(2010) 9 Supreme Court Cases 655], Premkumar T.R. v. Mahatma Gandhi University and Others [I.L.R 2018 (1) Kerala 993] and Rajesh Awasthi v. Nand Lal Jaiswal and 2 **W.P.(C) No. 16075 of 2018** Others [(2013) 1 Supreme court Cases 501] to argue that the challenge to the qualification of a person to hold a public office need not necessarily be maintained by an aggrieved party, and a stranger to the post can also maintain a legitimate challenge in court. The Senior counsel submits that the only responsibility cast on the challenger is to demonstrate that the person so appointed, was holding the post in breach of the Rules, and that he is continuing in office without satisfying the eligibility criteria. 4. In the above context, it is necessary for the court to bear in mind that the deficiencies pointed out in respect of the 5[th] respondent, relate to his appointment in the feeder cadre of Associate Professor and in that post he was appointed much earlier on 11.11.2015. Since then, the incumbent has been promoted as Professor and we are now informed that the 5[th] respondent is currently serving as the ProVice Chancellor of the University. 5. While the judgments relied upon by the learned Senior counsel make it clear that the writ of quo warranto can be invoked by a person to project that the holder of a public office is occupying the post without any legal authority and the issue of locus standi is answered in favour of the petitioner, we are confronted with a situation where the concerned person, who was earlier appointed as Associate Professor, has moved on to the higher post of Professor and now he is occupying the still higher position of Pro-Vice Chancellor. 6. If the petitioner's challenge relating the ineligibility of the 5[th] respondent to the post of Associate Professor is to be answered by the court, the challenge in 3 **W.P.(C) No. 16075 of 2018** our view should have been made at the relevant time when he was holding the post of Associate Professor. But unfortunately, the present challenge by way of PIL has been filed after three and half years. 7. We must indicate here that the delay we are referring to is with regard to the absence of challenge, when the 5[th] respondent was holding the post of Associate Professor, and in the context of a belated challenge when he is already promoted to the higher post of Professor. Under such circumstances, the writ of quo warranto, when the incumbent in question has moved on to a higher post, cannot in our view is maintainable. 8. Having concluded thus, we are disinclined to entertain this PIL by taking note of the pleadings in the writ petition, which entirely relates to the ineligibility of the incumbent to hold the post of Associate Professor, and there is no challenge whatsoever to the fact that the 5[th] respondent is ineligible to hold the post of ProVice Chancellor or the post of Professor. With the above observation, the writ petition stands dismissed. Sd/- **HRISHIKESH ROY ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE** Sd/- **A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE** mns **W.P.(C) No. 16075 of 2018** 4