IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN THURSDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 33096 of 2010(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BABU T.C., AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.T.V.CHAKKUNNY, THOTTUNGAL HOUSE, AYYAMPUZHA P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683581. BY ADV. SRI.A.G.BASIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRIT, KALADY, PIN-683574, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. VICE-CHANCELLOR & CHAIRMAN, SELECTION COMMITTEE FOR THE SELECTION OF ASSISTANTS, SREE SANKARACHARYA UNIVERSITY OF SANSKRIT, KALADY, PIN-683574. 3. THE DIRECTOR, LAL BAHADUR SASTRI (LBS) CENTRE FOR SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-605033. 4. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR SC, LBS CENTRE FOR R3 SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN,SC,SANKARACHA.UTY FOR R1,2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.NISHA BOSE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.33096 of 2010 J --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Sree Sankaracharya University of Sanskrit, Kalady issued Notification dated 8.2.2006 and a subsequent Notification dated 30.11.2009 calling for applications from candidates to the post of Assistants. Originally, the post was Assistant Grade-II and it was re-designated as Assistant which necessitated the notification dated 30.11.2009. The petitioner applied pursuant to Exhibit P1 notification. A written test was held. The petitioner appeared for the written test. The written test was conducted by the Lal Bahadur Sasthri Centre for Science & Technology (third respondent), as entrusted by the first respondent University. After the written test, the third respondent furnished the results of the first respondent. A short list was published. 2. The reliefs prayed for by the petitioner in the Writ Petition are the following : WPC 33096/2010 2 “(a) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction to the respondent University to make appointments from the rank list evolved pursuant to Exhibit P1 Notifications without any delay; (b) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction declaring that the respondent University to fill the 52 vacancies, as per Ext.P4 and Ext.P1 starting from Rotation Roster (Slot) No.1 to 20 first cycle up to 5th cycle (slot 100) in accordance with KS & SSR 1958 ; (c) Declare that any appointment made by the respondent University in pursuance to Ext.P1 Notification, not other than starting from slot No.1 is void and illegal. (d) Declare that non-appointment of list of persons furnished by the third respondent to the respondent University is unfair, unjust and illegal; (e) Declare that if any permanent appointments made by the respondent WPC 33096/2010 3 University in the category of Assistants, prior to obtaining Ext.P4 prior sanction, is null and void; (f) Declare that the appointments made in the Assistant category between the period of issuance of Exts.P8 and P4 is null and void. (g) Declare that the appointments made by the respondent University in the category of Assistant grades against Sec. 7 (xx, xxi) and Sec. 14(2) (h) of SSUS Act, 1994 as null and void ; (h) Declare that the appointments made by the respondent University in the category of Assistant grades against the dictum of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Karnataka vs. Umadevi, reported in 2006(4) SCC 1 and against the dictum of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mohd. Ashif and others vs. State of Bihar and others, reported in 2010(5) SCC 475 are null and void. (i) To grant such other appropriate relief to the petitioner as this Hon'ble Court WPC 33096/2010 4 may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.” 3. When the Writ Petition came up for admission on 11.11.2010, the following order was passed : “Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the limited relief which the petitioner would be seeking is to issue a direction to the University and the third respondent to publish the results of the examination in the website so that there will be transparency in the selection process. Learned Standing Counsel prays for time to get instructions. Post on 18.11.2010.” 4. A statement dated 16.11.2010 is filed by the Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent University. It is stated in the statement that pursuant to the Notification, the University received 20,354 applications. The third respondent was appointed as the agency to conduct the written test. The written test was held on 3.10.2010. A total number of 12,241 WPC 33096/2010 5 candidates appeared for the written test. The third respondent furnished the result sheet of the written test to the first respondent University on 29.10.2010. The University constituted a selection committee to conduct interview of the candidates and 467 candidates were shortlisted. Interview is scheduled to be held from 22.11.2010 to 20.12.2010. It is also stated in the statement that in the written test, the petitioner secured only 14.25 marks out of 100 marks. It is also stated that the lowest marks secured by the candidates included in the short list of candidates qualified to be called for the interview, in the open category is 49.75 marks. As regards the limited prayer made by the petitioner, it is stated in the statement thus : “When the selection is based on the marks obtained in the written test and the interview, till the interview is over the marks obtained in the written test is to be kept undisclosed. Otherwise, it will have a bearing on the performance in the interview and the marks likely to be awarded in the interview. Only after the interview is over the marks secured in the written test could be published.” WPC 33096/2010 6 The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner would be satisfied, if the results of the written test of all the candidates who appeared for the test is published after the interview and preparation of the rank list is over. The Standing Counsel appearing for the University submitted that the University will publish the results of the written test in respect of all the candidates, after the interview and publishing of the rank list are over. The submission made by the learned Standing Counsel for the University is recorded. No further orders are required in the Writ Petition. The Writ Petition is accordingly closed recording the statement and the submission made by the Standing Counsel appearing for the University. K.T.SANKARAN JUDGE csl