IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2011 / 31ST ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 19419 of 2011(B) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- CHIKKU.A.M, D/O.MADHUSOODHANAN, THEJUS, VP 1/42, NPP NAGAR, PEROORKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 005. BY ADVS. SRI.D.KISHORE, SMT.MINI GOPINATH. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE SREE NARAYANA TRUSTS, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, POST BOX NO.63, KOLLAM-691 001. 4. THE MANAGER, SREE NARAYANA COLLEGE, KOLLAM-691 001. 5. THE PRINCIPAL, SREE NARAYANA COLLEGE, KOLLAM-691 001. 6. THE PRINCIPAL, SREE NARAYANA COLLEGE FOR WOMEN, KOLLAM-691 001. W.P.(C). NO.19419/2011-B: 7. VINOD.B.S, `RESMI', KARIKODE, T.K.M.C.P.O., KOLLAM-691 005. 8. VISHNU.S.L., PALAZHI PUTHEN VEEDU, MADAVOOR, PALLICKAL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-690 563. 9. THE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY BUILDINGS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 10. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001. R1 & R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. V. VIJULAL, R3 TO R6 BY ADVS. SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU, SRI.P.GOPALAKRISHNAN (MVA), R9 & R10 BY ADV. SRI.M.RAJAGOPALAN NAIR, S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.19419/2011-B: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION DTD. 14/05/2010 PUBLISHED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DAILY DTD. 23/05/2010. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE UGC NORMS FOR SELECTION. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. 5(C)/2297 DTD. 20/10/2010 OF THE R.3. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE DETAILS OF INFORMATION REQUESTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. PRO/P10/RTI/091/2011 DTD. 11/04/2011 OF THE R.9. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE INFORMATION SOUGHT FOR BY THE PETITIONER FROM R.9 ON 20/04/2011. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. PRO/P10/RTI/100/2011 DTD. 28/04/2011 OF THE R.9. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DT. 29/06/2011. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.19419/2011-B ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved by the denial of appointment as a Lecturer in Bio-Chemistry. Ext.P1 is the notification issued by the Management inviting application for appointment to the post of Lecturers in various subjects including Bio-Chemistry. It is mentioned that 50% of the vacancies are reserved for community quota. 2. Pursuant to the notification, the petitioner, respondent Nos.7 and 8 and several others applied for the post of Lecturer in Bio-Chemistry. The petitioner is having the qualification of M.Sc Bio-Chemistry in first class with distinction and has secured third rank from the University of Kerala in the year 2008 and she has also succeeded in CSIR-JRF (Fellowship) and acquired NET. 3. After the selection process was completed, she was included as rank No.5. The details of the persons included in the ranked list have been given in para.4 W.P.(C). No.19419/2011 -:2:- of the writ petition. It is the case of the petitioner that even though she belongs to Ezhava community and was entitled for appointment in the community quota, the seventh and eighth respondents have been appointed and the petitioner is also disputing the sufficiency of their qualifications. Accordingly the petitioner has filed a complaint before the University as per Ext.P8. 4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel appearing for the Management and the learned Standing Counsel for the University. 5. The learned counsel for the Management submitted that the appointment is properly in terms of the notification and other Statutes. Learned counsel for the petitioner points out that Sl.Nos.7 and 8 ought not have been appointed and their selection is liable to be set aside. Learned Standing Counsel for the University submitted that only in respect of the seventh respondent, the proposal has been received from the Management for granting approval. 6. Since the issue will have to be considered by the University itself before granting approval, it is W.P.(C). No.19419/2011 -:3:- only proper that the petitioner is relegated to the remedy of approaching the University. Herein, the petitioner has already filed a representation as per Ext.P8. Learned counsel for the Management further submitted that there is a remedy under the Statute to approach the University Appellate Tribunal also. Therefore, before any decision is taken for approving the appointment, the objection of the petitioner will be considered and a personal hearing will also be offered to the petitioner, the appointee and the Management. Appropriate decision will be taken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. All the legal questions raised by the petitioner are left open. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Sd/- (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms