M Anil Kumar v. Vc Jntu., Hyd., And 3 Others,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI WRIT PETITION No.34185 of 2017 ORDER:

The writ petition is filed seeking a Writ of Mandamus declaring the action of respondents in not selecting the petitioner as a Contract Lecturer for the academic year 2017-18 as illegal, arbitrary, grossly discriminatory, violative of principles of natural justice and Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

Heard Sri V.V.Suresh Kumar, counsel for petitioner and Sri V.Ramchander Goud, Standing Counsel for respondents. It has been contended by the petitioner that he is fully eligible and qualified to be appointed as a Lecturer and was appointed as a Contract Lecturer for the academic year 2014-15 and since then he has been working as Contract Lecturer to the best satisfaction of respondents. Counsel for petitioner contend that the tenure of contract was extended from time to time, however, for the academic year 2017-18, respondents have issued a notification and petitioner has responded to the said notification. The grievance of the petitioner is that though he is working on contract basis since 4 years, his case was not considered and he was not selected.

Respondents have filed counter affidavit contending that the petitioner has participated in the selection process, but he had not come up within the zone of consideration, and hence, he was not considered for appointment.

Counsel for petitioner contended that the petitioner's case may be considered as and when vacancy arises. The Standing Counsel appearing for respondents has contended that the case of the petitioner would be considered, only if the petitioner submits a representation staking his claim for appointment on contract basis as and when vacancy arises. This Court, having considered the rival submissions, is of the considered view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the petitioner to submit a fresh representation to the respondents within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, staking his claim for appointment as Contract Lecturer, and upon such representation being made, the respondents shall consider the case of the petitioner as and when vacancy arises, in accordance with the Regulations of the respondent-University.

The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions. No order as to costs.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall stand closed. ______________________________ ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI, J 1st November, 2019 ajr