^es^ IN THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ( [j^ ro AT BILASPUR W. P. fS) N0. ^S-^ / 2008 Petitioner -•^; VJ^"* Dr. Shama Afroz Beig, ^^ w/o Mohd. Yusuf, •^V .,<"^u"' ..••' Agedabout37years, ) .>.-»^$f"" .-•••"" R/° saket Coloyy, ^^•^'...-V'- ../" Respondents ^' ^ ,4 ^ rf' >\^ 1. 2. Kathul Board, Distt. : Durg-(C.G.) / State of Chhattisgarh, Through - Department of Higher Education, D.K.S.Bhawan, Raipur- (C.G.) The Commissioner, Higher Educadon Sanchanalay, Government Science College Parsiar, Raipur-fC.G.) WRIT PETITION U/A 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILA8PUR WRIT PETITION <S) No. 2622 of2008 PETmONER : Dr. Shama Afi-oz Beig. VERSUS RESPONDENTS : State ofChhattisgai-h & another. WRIT PETITION U/A 226 OF THE CONSTnUTION OF INDIA SB: Hon'Me ShrLSatishK. A@ihoQi, J. Present: Shri Sudeep Agrawal, Advocate forthe petitioner. Shri A-V.Sliridhar, Panel Lawyer forthe State/respondents. ORALORDER (Passed on 16fh day of Febmar^', 2010) 1. The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent No. 2 to consider the case oftfae petitioner for appoinlment onthe post ofAssistant Professor (Micro Biology). 2. The indisputable facts, in nutshell, are that pursuant to the advertisement (Annexure P/2), the petitioner made an application for appointment on the post of Assistant Professor (Micro Biology) on contract basis for academic session ending on 30.04.2008. 3. Shri Agrawal, leamed counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that fhe petitioner is eompetent for consideration and appointment on the post of Assistant Professor (Micro Biolog^-) on the basis of letter dated 24.01.2008 (Annexure P/6) issued by the Joint Secretary, University Grants Commission, addressed to the husband ofthe petitioner namely Mohd. Yusuf, Advocate. 4. Be that as it may, fu-stly the appointment was for one academic year which admittedly has come to an end on 30,04.2008. Even if the submissioa of the petitioner is considered that there was extension of ,S 3aa?t8 's-. ^ '!t». ''ii '%!,£ 7. contract period, that still does not conf'er any right on the petitioner to be considered beyond 30.04.2008. So far as qualification ofthe petitioner with regai'd to her eligibility for being considered for appointment on the aforesaid post is concemed, it is for the experts in the field and the academic bodies to decide the qualtfication of a candidate. Thus, no lindings ean be recorded m respect of the fact asto whether the petitioner was qualified to be considered for appointinent on the aforesaid post. Furfher, the period of contract appointmeut has also come to an end. Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has applied for selection and appointment on the post of Assistant Professor (Micro Biology) on contract basis for academic session, which has already come to an end on 30.04.2008, the question raised in this petition has become question ofacademic interest. It is well settled principle oflaw that no academic question can be decided for want of relevant facts. Thus, this petition has become infructuous. In view ofthe above, the writ petition is dismissed. No order asto costs. Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge ' Arr!-i+