WA Nos. 338/2010; 1679/2010; 1706/2010; 358/2010 (Dr. E. Prakash vs Calicut Adarsha Sanskrit Vidyapeetha & Others)

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** # **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR** **TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 23RD ASWINA, 1941** ## **WA.No.338 OF 2010** **AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.11.2009 IN WPC 33756/2008 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA** ## **APPELLANT/ADDITIONAL 4TH RESPONDENT:** **DR.E.PRAKASH S/O.T.P.KRISHNAN NAMBEESAN,, RESIDING AT `APRAMEYA' HOUSE, NANMANDA P.O., BALUSSERRY.** **BY ADVS. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY SRI.S.A.ANAND SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO SRI.C.R.RAMESH SMT.N.SANTHA** ## **RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3:** **1 DR.V.SATHYAVATHY, SENIOR LECTURER, CALICUT ADARSHA SANSKRIT, VIDYAPEETHA, BALUSSERRY, CALICUT. 2 THE CALICUT ADARSHA SANSKRIT VIDYAPEETHA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHAIRMAN, OF THE MANAGING COMMITTEE, BALUSSERRY, CALICUT.** **3 THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DEVELOPMENT, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI.** 2 **WA.Nos.338/2010, 1679/2010,** **1706/2010 & 358/2010** **4 RASHTRIYA SANSKRIT SANSTHAN DEEMED UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS, REGISTRAR, 56-57, INSTITUTION AREA,, JANAKAPURI, NEW DELHI-110 058.** **R4 BY ADV. SRI.CHERIAN VARGHESE R1 BY ADV. SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY R4 BY ADV. SRI.N.M.MADHU SC RASHTRIYA SANKRI SD UT R2 BY ADV. R.K.MURALEEDHARAN(B/O) R2-3 BY SMT.O.M.SHALINA, CGC ASGI FOR R3** **THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.10.2019, ALONG WITH WA.1679/2010, WA.1706/2010, WA.358/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** 3 **WA.Nos.338/2010, 1679/2010,** **1706/2010 & 358/2010** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR** **TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 23RD ASWINA, 1941** ## **WA.No.1679 OF 2010** **AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WPC 33756/2008 DATED 24-11-2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA** **APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.3 IN WPC 33756/2008:** **RASHTRIYA SANSKRIT SANSTHAN DEEMED UNIVERSITY, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR 56-57,, INSTITUTION AREA, JANAKAPURI, NEW DELHI-110058.** **BY ADV. SRI.N.M.MADHU SC RASHTRIYA SANKRI SD UT** **RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 & 4 IN WPC 33756/2008:** - **1 DR.V.SATHIAVATHY SR.LECTURER, CALICUT ADARSHA SANSKRIT VIDYAPEETHA,, BALUSSERY, CALICUT-673612.** - **2 THE CALICUT ADARSHA SANSKRIT VIDYAPEETHA,, REP. BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE MANAGING COMMITTEE,, BALUSSERY, CALICUT-673612.** - **3 THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY SECRETARY,, MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI-5.** 4 **WA.Nos.338/2010, 1679/2010,** **1706/2010 & 358/2010** **4 DR.E.PRAKASH, S/O.T.P.KRISHNAN NAMBEESAN RESIDING AT 'APRAMAYA' HOUSE, NAMMADA P.O., BALUSSERY-673 612.** **R4 BY ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY R4 BY ADV. SRI.S.A.ANAND R4 BY ADV. SMT.L.ANNAPOORNA R4 BY ADV. SRI.K.A.BALAN R4 BY ADV. SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN R2 BY ADV. SRI.R.K.MURALEEDHARAN R1 BY ADV. SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY R4 BY ADV. SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO R4 BY ADV. SMT.N.SANTHA R4 BY ADV. SRI.V.VARGHESE R2,R3 BY SMT.O.M.SHALINA, CGC R3 BY ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL** **THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.10.2019, ALONG WITH WA.1706/2010, WA.338/2010, WA.358/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** 5 **WA.Nos.338/2010, 1679/2010,** **1706/2010 & 358/2010** ## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE** **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR** **TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 23RD ASWINA, 1941** **WA.No.1706 OF 2010** **AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.11.2009 IN WPC 7448/2009 DATED 2411-2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA** **APPELLANT/RESPONDENT NO.2 IN WPC 7448/2009:** **RASHTRIYA SANSKRIT SANSTHAN DEEMED UNIVERSITY, REP.BY ITS REGISTRAR-5657,INDUSTRIAL AREA, JANAKAPURI, NEW DELHI-110058** **BY ADV. SRI.N.M.MADHU,SC,RASHTRIYA SANKRI SD UT** ## **RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1,3 & 4 IN WPC 7448/2009:** - **1 S.VICRAMAN, SENIOR GRADE LECTURER (VEDANTHA) CALICUT ADARSHA SANSKRIT VIDYAPEETHA,, P.O.BALUSSERY, KOZHIKODE-673612** - **2 UNION OF INDIA REPRESETNED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI** **3 THE CALICUT ADARSH SANSKRIT VIDYAPEETHA REP.BY THE CHAIRMAN,P.O.BALUSSERY, KOZHIKODE-673612** 6 **WA.Nos.338/2010, 1679/2010,** **1706/2010 & 358/2010** **4 DR.E.PRAKASH PRINCIPAL-IN-CHARGE, CALICUT ADARSHA SANSKRIT VIYAPEETHA, P.O.BALUSSERY,KOZHIKODE-673612.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.ANIL K.NAIR R4 BY ADV. SMT.L.ANNAPOORNA R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SR. R4 BY ADV. SRI.V.VARGHESE R2 BY ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL R2-3 BY SMT.O.M.SHALINA, CGC R4 BY ADV. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY R4 BY ADV. SMT.N.SANTHA R4 BY ADV. SRI.S.A.ANAND R4 BY ADV. SRI.K.A.BALAN R4 BY ADV. SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO** **THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.10.2019, ALONG WITH WA.1679/2010, WA.338/2010, WA.358/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** 7 **WA.Nos.338/2010, 1679/2010,** **1706/2010 & 358/2010** **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE** ## **&** **THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.V.ANILKUMAR** **TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2019 / 23RD ASWINA, 1941** ## **WA.No.358 OF 2010** **AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.11.2009 IN WPC 7448/2009 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA** ## **APPELLANT/4TH RESPONDENT:** **DR.E.PRAKASH** **FORMERLY PRINCIPAL IN-CHARGE, PRESENTLY WORKING, AS LECTURER IN SANSKRIT(SAHITHYA), CALICUT, ADARSHA SANSKRIT VIDYAPEETHA, P.O.BALUSSERY,, KOZHIKODE-673 612.** **BY ADVS. SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY SRI.S.A.ANAND SRI.K.A.BALAN SRI.PETER JOSE CHRISTO SRI.C.R.RAMESH SMT.N.SANTHA** ## **RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3:** **1 S.VICRAMAN SENIOR GRADE LECTURER (VEDANTHA),, CALICUT ADARSHA SANSKRIT VIDYAPEETHA,, P.O.BALUSSERY, KOZHIKODE-673 612.** **2 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCES, DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI.** **3 RASHTRIYA SANSKRIT SANSTHAN DEEMED UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR,, 56-57, INDUSTRIAL AREA, JANAKAPURI, NEW DELHI-110 058.** 8 **WA.Nos.338/2010, 1679/2010,** **1706/2010 & 358/2010** **4 THE CALICUT ADARSH SANSKRIT VIDYAPEETHA REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, P.O.BALUSSERY,, KOZHIKODE-673 612.** **R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN R3 BY ADV. SRI.CHERIAN VARGHESE R1 BY ADV. SRI.K.JAJU BABU SR. R2 BY ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL R3 BY ADV. SRI.N.M.MADHU,SC,RASHTRIYA SANKRI SD UT R4 BY ADV. SMT.O.M.SHALINA** **THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15.10.2019, ALONG WITH WA.1679/2010, WA.1706/2010, WA.338/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** 9 **WA.Nos.338/2010, 1679/2010,** **1706/2010 & 358/2010** ## **JUDGMENT** **Dated this the 15th day of October 2019** ## **Shaffique, J** These appeals have been filed against a common judgment dated 24.11.2009 in W.P.(C).No.33756/2008 & 7448/2009. The question relates to a notification issued by the Calicut Adarsh Sanskrit Vidyapeetha for the appointment to the post of Principal by direct recruitment. The notification is Ext.P6. As per Ext.P6, the essential qualification required to the post reads as under: “Essential: i. Consistently good academic record with a 1[st] or High IInd class (55% or above marks or its equivalent grade of 'B' in 7 point scale with letter grades O, A, B, C, D, E and F) in Acharya or M.A. (Skt.) or an equivalent oriental Degree from a recognised examining body. ii. Research Degree in Sanskrit of a recognised University or Examining body. Iii. Ability to teach through the medium of Sanskrit. iv. At last 10 years experience of teaching graduate or post graduate classes in a recognised institution. v. He/She should have made some mark in the areas of scholarship as evidenced by quality or Publications contribution to educational innovation design of new courses and carricula.” The notification came to be challenged by two persons who contended that the notification was not in accordance with the UGC regulations and that Service Rules were not framed during the relevant time. W.A.Nos. 338/2010 & 358/2010 are filed by the 4[th] respondent Dr. E 10 **WA.Nos.338/2010, 1679/2010,** ## **1706/2010 & 358/2010** Prakash who was selected to the said post as Principal but the appointment was not effected. However, he remained as Principal-incharge in the light of the direction issued by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.2181/2008 & 2184/2008 decided on 6.8.2009. 2. The respondents in the writ petition contended that though Rules had not been framed, by virtue of a scheme introduced by the Government of India, appointments to various staff as well as Principal were being made. Ext.P2 is the said Scheme which was sent by the Government of India, Ministry of Human Resource Development to the Principal Calicut Adarsh Sanskrit Vidyapeetha. As per the Scheme, the service conditions of the Principal was clearly narrated. That apart, it was contended that UGC Regulations were clearly followed while issuing the notification and taking into consideration the fact that it is a Sanskrit College, specific emphasis has been given to the subject Sanskrit in the notification. 3. The learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment held that the notification was not in terms with the UGC Regulations as far as items 1 and 2 are concerned. 4. The essential qualification items 1 and 2 in the UGC Regulations produced as Ext.P15 as extracted in the judgment reads as under: 11 **WA.Nos.338/2010, 1679/2010,** ## **1706/2010 & 358/2010** “1. A Master's Degree with at least 55% of the marks or its equivalent grade of B in the 7 point scale with letter grades O, A, B, C, D, E & F. 2. Ph.D. or equivalent qualification.” As far as item No.1 is concerned, it is stated that the candidates should have Master's Degree with at least 55 % of marks or its equivalent grade of 'B' in 7 point scale with letter grades O,A,B,C,D,E and F. In the impugned notification it is indicated that candidates should have good academic record with 55% or above marks equivalent to the grades specified and further stated that he should be an Acharya or MA (Sanskrit) or an equivalent oriental Degree from a recognised examining body. When Master's Degree with 55% marks has been prescribed as a qualification for the post of Principal (Reader's Grade) and the College is essentially a Sanskrit College, there is nothing wrong in prescribing Acharya or M.A. (Sanskrit) or an equivalent oriental degree from a recognised examining body as qualification. We don't think that the same runs contrary to the qualification prescribed by the UGC, whereas it is a better qualification as far as a Sanskrit College is concerned which is permissible under law. 5. As far as the 2[nd] item in the notification is concerned, reference is made to Ph.D or equivalent qualification. In the notification it is stated as research degree in Sanskrit of a recognised University or examining body. Apparently, Ph.D degree itself is a 12 **WA.Nos.338/2010, 1679/2010,** ## **1706/2010 & 358/2010** research degree and the only insistence they made is that it should be in Sanskrit of a recognised University or examining body. The insistence for Sanskrit is definitely on account of the fact that it is a Sanskrit College and it being a higher qualification as prescribed, it does not run contrary to the UGC guidelines. Once UGC regulations are framed and it is approved, the colleges are bound to follow the same. But there is nothing wrong in prescribing a higher qualification, taking into account the nature of academic standards to be maintained in each college. 6. Taking into account the aforesaid factual aspects, we don't think that any error was committed by the College in issuing Ext.P6 notification as it does not run contrary to the UGC regulations. 7. Now coming to the other reason for refusing the selection to the post of Principal, the learned Single Judge observed that Service Rules had not been framed. But no reference had been made to the scheme which was approved by the Government which contains the relevant Service conditions for the appointment to the said post. Of course, it would have been appropriate for the College to have framed the Rules also. But nevertheless, when a selection is being made to the post of Principal which is vacant, until the Rules have been framed, the Scheme could as well apply for the purpose of appointment. 13 **WA.Nos.338/2010, 1679/2010,** ## **1706/2010 & 358/2010** 8. It is now brought to our notice that Rules had been framed and pursuant to which fresh notification had been issued in the year 2018 and Dr. E Prakash had been selected and appointed as the Principal. It is pointed out that after the judgment, the College had appointed a few other persons as Principal-in-charge and presently Dr.E Prakash himself is the Principal of the College. 9. As the matter stands now, the substantial grievance of the petitioner had already been taken care of on account of the compliance of the direction in the judgment and fresh notification issued by the College. It is true that a person who was selected by following the due process was not given appointment on account of the judgment of the learned Single Judge. But substantial time had already elapsed and the very same person has again been appointed as Principal after complying with the procedural formalities. 10. The learned counsel for the appellant/Dr. E Prakash however would request that an appointment being made based on Ext.P6 notification and consequential benefits by way of salary and other perks as Principal of the College be ordered. But this is a case in which the appellant, Dr. Prakash has not worked in the capacity as Principal after the judgment of the learned Single Judge. Under such circumstances, there is no point in issuing any such direction. 14 **WA.Nos.338/2010, 1679/2010,** ## **1706/2010 & 358/2010** In the light of the aforesaid discussion, the appeals are allowed setting aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge. kp **Sd/A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE Sd/T.V.ANILKUMAR** True copy **JUDGE** P.A. To Judge