THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY WRIT PETITION No.24277 of 2000 ORDER: The petitioner and respondent No.2 were working as Readers by 1993. The Osmania University, respondent No.1 herein, issued a notification on 12.07.1993 inviting applications for the post of Professor in the Department of History. The petitioner and respondent No.2 applied. The Selection Committee constituted for that purpose and selected respondent No.2 and the Board of Management accepted the recommendations. Consequently, respondent No.2 was appointed as Professor, through order, dated 05.12.1994. The petitioner challenges the same. He contends that respondent No.2 does not possess the basic qualifications for the post of Professor and still respondent No.1 selected and appointed him. He further contends that he possesses the relevant qualifications mentioned in the notification and there is no justification on the part of respondent No.1 in not appointing him as Professor. Smt.M.Venkateswari, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the post advertised by the University has more proximity with the Department of Archeology and still, a Reader from the Department of History was selected. She contends that the petitioner had rich experience both on teaching and research side in the Department of Archeology and the Selection Committee did not consider his case at all. The learned counsel further submits that respondent No.2 was not eligible to apply to the post at all. The learned Standing Counsel for the University and Sri Y.Ashok Raj, learned counsel for respondent No.2, on the other hand, submit that the post of Professor is in the Department of History and the specialization was in the Ancient Indian History. They contend that Archeology was only a small facet along with Culture with reference to the History and as a matter of fact, the petitioner was not qualified at all. In the notification, dated 12.07.1993, the University stipulated the qualifications for the post. The nomenclature of the post itself is the one in the Department of Ancient Indian History, Culture and Archeology. It is basically in the department of History and it connotes with specialization in that subject. The word Archeology occurs together with Culture only to denote one of the areas of specialization. Since there was no restriction for submission of applications, respondent No.2 applied and his case was considered by the Selection Committee. It is just un-understandable as to how a Reader from Archeology can be claimed to be selected and appointed as Professor in the Department of History. Various allegations made by the petitioner as to the holding of qualifications by respondent No.2 are belied by the recitals in the order of appointment itself. It is clearly mentioned that respondent No.2 is a Post Graduate and a Doctorate from the Osmania University. From the fact that he was occupying the post of Reader discloses that he holds all requisite qualifications. The petitioner has certified to himself superiority by making reference to his performance in the department of Archeology. In the complaint made by him, the Department of Archeology dealt with the matter in detail, the purport of the notification and the qualifications held by the candidates. The Selection Committee is not made as a party. It is settled principle of law that the recommendations made by an expert body like a Selection Committee cannot be reviewed by this Court, unless any mala fides were attributed to the members thereof. At any rate, the petitioner has since retired from service. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs. ______________________ L.NARASIMHA REDDY,J Dt: 25.11.2010. kdl