Manoranjan Kumar v. Rajendra Agricultural University And ORS

Patna High Court CWJC No.11162 of 2016 dt.23-08-2016

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.11162 of 2016 ===========================================================

1. Manoranjan Kumar Son of Late Bharat ChoudharY Presently residing at 3/2, R.A.U. Pusa, Campus, P.S.- Pusa, District- Samastipur. Petitioner/s

Versus

1.Rajendra Agricultural University, Bihar, Pusa, Samastipur, through its Registrar having office at Pusa, Samastipur.

2. Vice-Chancellor, Rajendra Agricultural University, Bihar, Pusa, Samastipur.

3. The Faculty Development Committee through its member. Secretary, Rajendra Agricultural University, Pusa, Samastipur.

4. The Dean College of Agricultural Engineering, Rajendra Agricultural University, Pusa, Samastipur.

... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Gajanan Arun For the Respondent/s : Mr. Arvind Ujjwal =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI ORAL JUDGMENT Date: 23-08-2016 Writ has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the decision of the Faculty Development Committee dated 01.06.2016 contained in Annexure-6 as well as the office order dated 14th June, 2016 contained in Annexure-7 by virtue of which the persons whose names indicated therein have been allowed to pursue their studies for award of Ph.D. degree.

At the outset, the Court is of the opinion that a writ Court should exercise its discretion in such matters of decision making in a very very circumspect manner. If the decision under the faculty augmentation or development scheme lays down parameters and there is no scope of subjectivity such decision making should be left to the authorities of the university who know best.

Patna High Court CWJC No.11162 of 2016 dt.23-08-2016 Admittedly, the petitioner is sixth on the list of the faculty of the department and he is raising a grievance against selection of other faculty members from other department who have been given permission. Obviously the petitioner has no commitment to work or dedication to the assignment, rather he is more bothered about enhancing his personal career prospect whatever be the fate of the university. As such, the university cannot be allowed to be used as a platform for self promotion through a Court of law and the Court will not help the petitioner in such matter. There is no element of irrationality or arbitrariness in the decision making process. Writ application is dismissed being devoid of merit. (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) B.Kr./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 26.08.2016 Transmission Date