Dr.A.Sait Sahul Hameed v. Thiruvalluvar University

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 25.01.2019 Coram The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.M.SUNDRESH and The Hon'ble Mr. Justice KRISHNAN RAMASAMY W.A.No. 2165 of 2012 and M.P.No.1 of 2012 Dr. A. Sait Sahul Hameed ... Appellant Vs

1. Thiruvalluvar University, Rep. By its Registrar Serkadu, Katpadi Tk, Vellore - 632 106.

2. The Vice Chancellor, Selection Committee for Teaching Faculty, Thiruvallur University, Serkadu, Katpadi Tk, Vellore - 632 106.

3. Dr. B. Senthilkumar ... Respondents Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the order dated 24.07.2012 passed in W.P.No. 3903 of 2011.

Prayer in W.P.No. 3903 of 2011:

Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus calling for the records of the 1st Respondent having reference No. TVU/R/Est./ 2010/2710 dated 09.11.2010 appointing the 3rd Respondent to the post of Professor in the Department of Zoology in the 1st Respondent University and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st Respondent to appoint the Petitioner to the said post. For Appellant ..

Ms. Kavitha Deenadayalan For Respondents..

Mr. M.C. Swamy for R1 and R2 Mr. G. Sankaran for R3

JUDGMENT

(Judgment of the Court was delivered by M.M.SUNDRESH, J.) This writ appeal is preferred against the order of the learned single Judge, who declined to grant the relief sought for by the appellant.

2.An advertisement was issued by the first respondent inviting applications from the eligible candidates for appointment to various posts. One of the posts so advertised was the post of Professor of Zoology. The appellant and the third respondent are few of the candidates who applied for the said post. The eligible candidates were called for the interview by the Selection Committee. The Selection Committee was constituted through the following members:

(1)The Vice Chancellor of Thiruvalluvar University was the Chair Person of the Selection Committee.

(2)Prof.R.Balasubramanian, Director, Faculty of Science and Humanities, SRM University, Kattankulathur was the Chancellor's nominee.

(3)Dr.S.Baskaran, Member Secretary, Tamil Nadu State Council for Higher Education, Chennai was the Government nominee.

(4)Dr.Vaidyanathan, Vice-Chancellor, Tamil Nadu Sports University, Chennai.

(5)Dr.Arumugam, Professor and Head, Department of Zoology, University of Madras, Guindy Campus, Chennai - 25 (belongs to Scheduled Caste community) (6)Dr.Sasikala, Professor and Head, Department of Zoology, Bharathiyar University, Coimbatore.

(7)Dr.Mullai Nathan, Professor, Department of Zoology, University of Madras, Guindy Campus, Chennai - 25.

3.The appellant, after attending the interview, challenged the constitution of the Selection Committee. The writ petition was ultimately dismissed and thereafter the selection was conducted. Accordingly having found that the third respondent had secured higher marks, appointment order was issued as against the appellant. Assessment was done individually and independently by the Selection Committee members. The other members were not supposed to know the marks awarded. After the interview was over, marks awarded to each candidate by each member was totalled and the total marks secured was taken up. The third respondent

secured 538 marks out of 700 as against the appellant, who secured 499.

4.Learned counsel appearing for the appellant would submit that marks have been wrongly awarded in favour of the third respondent and in the same way, the marks due to the appellant were denied.

5.Learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that the entire process has been done in a fair and transparent manner. The third respondent was further elevated as Controller of Examinations. It is submitted that the appellant would be reaching the age of superannuation by 31st of this month (31.01.2019). It is further submitted that the learned single Judge has considered the entire contentions and rejected them. Therefore, no interference is required.

6.A perusal of the order of the learned single Judge would show that the contentions raised have been considered. On the question of awarding 30 marks, we find that the third respondent has produced sufficient material before the Committee. Independently, every individual member of the Committee considered the material produced and passed the order. Secondly, the other marks have been awarded in favour of the third respondent after considering the relevant materials. On the awarding of zero marks to the appellant, we find that even assuming the same is not correct, the appellant would not be getting higher marks than the third respondent. In academic matters, this Court is not expected to act like an appellate authority and the attempt made by the appellant to pre-empt the Selection Committee to go on with the selection process ended in failure.

7.In such view of the matter, we are not inclined to interfere with the order of the learned single Judge who did consider the contentions raised by the appellant and found no irregularity. Hence the writ appeal stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS iii) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar mmi

To

1. The Registrar, Thiruvalluvar University, Serkadu, Katpadi Tk, Vellore - 632 106.

2. The Vice Chancellor, Selection Committee for Teaching Faculty, Thiruvallur University, Serkadu, Katpadi Tk, Vellore - 632 106.

+1cc to Mr.M.C. Swamy , Advocate SR.No. 5968 +1cc to Mr.G. Sankaran , Advocate SR.No. 6471 W.A.No.2165 of 2012 A.SK(25/02/2019)