LexGANAPATH SINGH GANGARAM SINGH RAJPUT versus GULBARGA UNIVERSITY REP.BY ITS REGISTRAR & OTHERS
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
(2013) 17 S.C.R. 1025 GANAPATH SINGH GANGARAM SINGH RAJPUT v. GULBARGA UNIVERSITY REP.BY ITS REGISTRAR & OTHERS (Civil Appeal No. 9866 of 2013) NOVEMBER 01, 2013 [CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD AND KURIAN JOSEPH, JJ.] A B Service Law - Appointment - Eligibility criteria - C Qualification - Post of University Lecturer in Masters' of Computer Application course (MCA) - Advertisement stipulated minimum qualification of post-graduate degree in the 'relevant subject' - Various persons including respondent no.3 and appellant offered their candidature - Respondent D no.3 possessed post-graduate degree in Computer Applications (MCA) - Appellant was M.Sc. in Mathematics but did not have degree in MCA - University constituted 'Board of appointment' consisting of experts for selecting suitable candidates - The Board made recommendation for E appointment of appellant - Recommendation approved by the Syndicate of the University - Writ petition filed by respondent no.3 - Single Judge of High Court upheld the appointment -o( appellant - Division Bench of High Court, however, quashed the appointment of appellant, and also F issued mandamus for appointment of respondent no.3 - On appeal, held: Language of the advertisement being clear and explicit, it has to pe given effect to - The advertisement required Masters' degree in 'relevant subject', which, in context of appointment to the post of Lecturer in MCA, would G mean post-graduate degree in MCA - 'Relevant subject' would not mean 'such of those subjects as are offered in the MCA course' - Consequently, plea of appellant that Mathematics is one of the subjects in MCA, therefore, appellant possessing 1025 H 1026 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2013] 17 S.C.R. A Masters' degree in Mathematics was eligible, is not tenable - Since appellant did not have a Masters' degree in Computer Application, he was not entitled to be considered for appointment as Lecturer in MCA - Division Bench of High Court rightly held appellant ineligible and quashed his B appointment - However, it erred in issuing mandamus for appointment of respondent no.3 - Kamataka Universities Act - s.53. Service Law - Appointment - To post of University C Lecturer - Decision of Expert body - Scope for judicial review - Held: Broadly, academic issues must be left to be decided by the expert body and the court cannot act as an appellate authority in such matters - When two views are possible and the expert body has taken a view, the same deserves acceptance - However, to say that expert body's opinion D deserves acceptance in all circumstances and is not subject to judicial review does not appeal - On facts, a 'Board of appointment' was constituted by the University concerned for selecting suitable candidates for the post of Lecturer in MCA course - When a candidate possessing the minimum E requisite qualification i.e. Masters' degree in MCA was available, the 'Board of appointment' could not have chosen an unqualified and ineligible person such as the appellant for appointment - Its recommendations were, therefore, illegal and invalid - The University erred in acting on such F recommendations and in appointing appellant as Lecturer in MCA course. The Gulbarga University issued notification inviting applications for appointment to various posts in different subjects including the post of Lecturer in Masters' in G Computer Application (MCA). The minimum qualification, for appointment to the said post of Lecturer was good academic record with at least 55% of marks or an equivalent grade at the Masters' Degree level in the H GANAPATH SINGH GANGARAM SINGH RAJPUT v. GUU3ARGA 1027 UNIVERSITY REP.BY ITS REG relevant subject from an Indian University or an A equivalent degree from a foreign University. Respondent no.3 and appellant besides other persons offered their candidature for appointment to the post of Lecturer in MCA. While Respondent no.3 8 possessed a post-graduate degree in MCA, the appellant claimed to have passed the M.Sc. examination in Mathematics. The University, in terms of Section 53 of the Karnataka Universities Act constituted a 'Board of appointment' for selecting suitable candidates. The C 'Board of appointment' interviewed the candidates and ultimately made recommendation for appointment of the appellant, who admittedly did not have a post-graduate degree in MCA, but had a Masters' Degree in Mathematics. The recommendation so
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.