Research › Search › Judgment

Rajasthan High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 692 (RAJ)

Suchitra Yadav v. University of Rajasthan

2019-02-28

ALOK SHARMA

body2019
JUDGMENT 1. Notice on the petition was issued on 1-2-2019. Even though appearance has been filed for the respondent University, reply to petition has not yet been filed. 2. Heard on stay application for reason of urgency expressed by Mr. Pradeep Mathur, counsel for the petitioners. 3. The case of the petitioners is that pursuant to an advertisement dated 22-5-2017 for various posts, including seven posts of Assistant Professor in the department of Physics, they alongwith other candidates applied. A screening test was in the circumstances resorted to through written examination for the purpose of shortlisting. The petitioners amongst others being successful, were called for the interview and were then selected as evident from the minutes of the Special Meeting of the Syndicate of the University on 29-5- 2018, whereunder it has been recorded that the Selection Committee had unanimously recommended for appointment of the petitioners as Assistant Professors in the department of Physics in order of their merit on substantive posts initially on probation for a period of two years subject to University Ordinances, Rules and Regulations. The minutes also record that the appointment of the petitioners would be subject to the outcome of final decision of SBCWP No. 9969/2018. 4. Mr. Pradeep Mathur submitted that despite the selection of the petitioners and endorsement thereof by the Syndicate of the University in its meeting on 29-5-2018 the petitioners have not yet been appointed as Assistant Professors in the department of Physics. It has been prayed that in the circumstances, interim directions be issued to the University for appointment of the petitioners as Assistant Professors in the department of Physics, no doubt subject to the outcome of final decision of SBCWP No. 9969/2018. 5. As reply to petition has not been filed by the University, I find no defence against the reasonable prayer of the petitioners on the presently uncontroverted facts. Aside of the aforesaid, it is shocking that despite selection of the petitioners as Assistant Professors in the department of Physics as early as in May, 2018, they have not yet been appointed as Assistant Professor in the department of Physics. Aside of the aforesaid, it is shocking that despite selection of the petitioners as Assistant Professors in the department of Physics as early as in May, 2018, they have not yet been appointed as Assistant Professor in the department of Physics. It is not difficult to visualize that the classes in the subject of Physics in the University must be running in the current year and absence of Assistant Professors in the department of Physics inevitably will have a long term adverse affect on the academic performance and future of the students concerned. 6. In this view of the matter, I would direct the respondent University in the interim to act forthwith in pursuance of selection of the petitioners as Assistant Professor in the department of Physics by the Selection Committee and the endorsement by the Syndicate of the University in its special meeting of 29-5-2018 and provisionally appoint the petitioners on the post of Assistant Professors in the department of Physics. The appointment of the petitioners shall however be subject to the outcome of any writ petition, where the selection process for the post of Asstt. Professor (Physics), of which the petitioners are the beneficiaries, is under challenge. 7. This order be complied with within 7 days from the presentation of certified copy of this order. 8. The stay application stands disposed of accordingly.