( 1 ) HEARD Learned counsel for the parties. ( 2 ) THE petitioner has prayed for quashing of the resolution of the executive council of Sampurnanand Sanskrit University dated 27. 11. 94 and for a mandamus directing the respondents not to terminate the services of the petitioner as Lecturer in Tulnatmaka dharma Darshan in Sampurna and Sanskrit University, Varanasi. ( 3 ) THE petitioner is a citizen of Bhutan. A vacancy on the post of lecturer in Tulnatmaka Dharma Darshan arose and was advertised vide Annexure 1 to the petition and the petitioner applied against the same. The petitioner was selected on 27. 1091 and joined on 2. 11. 91. ( 4 ) LEARNED counsel for petitioner has relied on Section 31 (2) (a) of u. P. State University Act which states that the appointment of a teacher in the first instance, shall be on probation for one year which may be extended for a period not exceeding one year. In our opinion this provision means that the maximum period of probation can be two years, and hence we agree with the submission of learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner became confirmed on 2. 11. 93 i. e on completion of two years since his joining. However it appears that subsequently the executive council of the University passed the impugned resolution 27. 11. 94 Annexure 15 to the petition by which it was resolved to terminate the services of the petitioner in pursuance of the letter of Ministry of Human Resources Central government dated 19. 5. 94 a copy of the aforesaid letter dated 19. 5. 94 is Annexure 4 to the Counter affidavit of the University. A perusal of the aforesaid letter dated 19. 594 shows that the Ministry of Human Affairs was of the view that as a matter of general policy foreigners should not ordinarily be appointed in Indian Universities and this should be done only in exceptional cases when Indians are not available. In our opinion the aforesaid circular of the Ministry of human Affairs is wholly arbitrary and deserves to be quashed. It must be understood that Universities are centres of higher learning and they are not schools or colleges. Hence for the country to progress the best intellectuals should be made available in universities and other centres of higher learning so that academic standard in the country go up. It must be understood that Universities are centres of higher learning and they are not schools or colleges. Hence for the country to progress the best intellectuals should be made available in universities and other centres of higher learning so that academic standard in the country go up. If the approach of the Human resources Ministry is accepted the result will that inferior level or mediocre Indians may be appointed as teachers in Universities although much more brilliant foreigners are available. In our opinion such a view cannot be accepted. If our nation is to progress it must insist on very high academic standards and academic rigor. ( 5 ) A University is not an employment exchange for providing employment to people. It is a center of higher learning, where the top intellectuals should be appointed of pursuing higher studies, research and imparting higher education. In our opinion there can be no discrimination between Indians and non-Indians in Universities and other centres of higher learning. ( 6 ) IN this connection it maybe noted that in ancient India there were great universities like Nalanda and Taxila where foreigners form china Tibet, etc. were not only students but also teachers. In our opinion foreigners should not be denied teaching post in the centres of higher learning if the are meritorious. In our opinion appointments of teachers in a university is not a question of giving a job to a person, it is much more a question of maintaining high academic standards. ( 7 ) IF the stand of the Ministry of Human Recourses as contained in the letter dated 19. 5. 94, is accepted then other countries can deny teaching jobs to Indian nationals. At present a large number of indians are teaching in American British and other foreign universities, and we should emulate the example of these foreign countries which appoint the most meritorious persons whenever available in the world. ( 8 ) IN the Rigveda it is said let noble thoughts come to us from every side. In our opinion we should adopt this non-parochial approach in academic matters also, particularly in centres of higher learning. ( 9 ) IN our opinion the circular of the Ministry of Human Resources dated 19. 5. 94 is arbitrary and it si hereby quashed. In our opinion we should adopt this non-parochial approach in academic matters also, particularly in centres of higher learning. ( 9 ) IN our opinion the circular of the Ministry of Human Resources dated 19. 5. 94 is arbitrary and it si hereby quashed. ( 10 ) THERE is no provision in the U. P. State Universities Act which states that only Indians can be appointed in the Universities, Section 31 of the Act does not state that only Indians can be appointed as teachers. Of course it can be verified whether the foreigner is a security risk or not or is otherwise unfit, but if there if nothing against him we see no reason why he should not be appointed in our centres of higher learning if meritorious. ( 11 ) IN the circumstances we quash the resolution of the Executive council dated 27. 11. 94 and also quash the order of the Ministry of human Resources dated 19. 5. 94. Petition is allowed. Petition Allowed. .