IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 15TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 1618 of 2009(P) PETITIONERS: 1. DR.SREEKALA G.S., AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHIBHAVAN, VELLINAZHI, PALAKKAD. 2. DR. SUDHA B. SOIL SURVEY OFFICER, DEPARMENT OF AGRICULTURE, (SOIL CONSERVATION UNIT), ALAPPUZHA. 3. DR. JACOB D, SOIL SURVEY OFFICER, DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, (SOIL CONSERVATION UNIT), PALAKKAD. 4. DR. VEENA VIGHNESWARAN, SOIL SURVEY OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR,(SOIL SURVEY) ALAPPUZHA. 5. DR. BEENA R, RESEARCH ASSOCIATE, DEPARTMENT OF CORP PHYSIOLOGY, UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCE, GKVK, BANGALORE -65. BY SENIOR ADV. SRI.P.RAVINDRAN SRI.HARIKRISHNAN RAVINDRAN RESPONDENTS: 1. KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, MAIN CAMPUS, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR 680 656. 2. THE REGISTRAR, KERALA AGRICULTURAL UNIVERSITY, MAIN CAMPUS, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR 680 656 R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN,SC,KERALA AGRL.UTY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.T.SANKARAN, J. ------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) NO. 1618 OF 2009 P ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 4th February, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioners 1 to 4 are working as Agricultural Officers in the Department of Agriculture, Government of Kerala. The fifth petitioner is working in the Department of Crop Physiology in the College of Basic Sciences and Humanities, G.K.V.K. University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore. It is stated that the petitioners have acquired Post Graduate Degree in various specialties of Agricultural Sciences and Doctorates in the respective subjects. 2. The Kerala Agricultural University invited applications for appointment to the post of Assistant Professors in various Krishi Vigyan Kendras and externally aided projects. Ext.P1 notification was issued on 24.9.2007. Later, on 9.10.2007, Ext.P2 notification was issued inviting applications for the very same posts in modification of Ext.P1 notification. It is stated that petitioners applied pursuant to Ext.P2 notification. The General Council of the University passed a resolution on 4.10.2007 enhancing the upper age limit for appointment in the University to 40 years. Consequential amendments were also made in the Statute. W.P.(C) NO.1618 OF 2009 :: 2 :: 3. It would appear that a notification dated 9.10.2007 was issued, wherein it was provided that the candidates shall not be over 35 years as on 1.1.2007. However, on 15.11.2007, another notification was issued wherein it was provided that the candidates shall not be over 40 years of age as on 1.1.2007. The resolution of the General Council amending the upper age limit was assented to by the Chancellor only subsequently. In the mean time, without awaiting for the decision of the Chancellor, the applications were rejected by the University in respect of those candidates who have crossed the age of 35 as on 1.1.2007. That decision was challenged in W.P.(C) No.13794 of 2008 and connected cases, which were disposed of as per Ext.P5 judgment dated 22.9.2008. It is to be noted that during the pendency of the Writ Petitions, the Governor granted assent to the amendment. Taking note of all the facts and circumstances, this court took the view in Ext.P5 judgment that the University was not justified in rejecting the applications pending decision of the Chancellor. The University was directed to consider the candidature of the petitioners in those Writ Petitions along with other persons who are similarly situated and who have responded to the notifications dated 9.10.2007 and 5.11.2007. The University was also directed to finalize the selection expeditiously. 4. The grievance of the petitioners in this Writ Petition is that the W.P.(C) NO.1618 OF 2009 :: 3 :: University has not finalized the select list in respect of certain categories of posts, while the list was finalized in respect of majority of the other disciplines. Sri.P.Ravindran, learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that since persons in the select list already published are being appointed, it would affect the seniority of the persons selected in the disciplines in which the petitioners applied due to the delay in the selection process in respect of those disciplines. 5. The relief prayed for by the petitioners is for the issue of a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to publish the select list for appointment to the post of Assistant Professors in the faculties of Horticulture, Agronomy, Plant Physiology and Plant Breeding. 6. A statement is filed on behalf of the respondents, wherein it is stated thus: “4. Pursuant to Ext.P5 judgment four rank lists were revised that in the disciplines of Soil & Water Engineering, Farm Power Machinery, Home Science and Agricultural Entomology. This was done for including the candidates who were left out because of over age and who had already appeared in interview pursuant to the direction of this Hon'ble Court in the connected writ petitions. The appointments were made in the above said four disciplines there was no need for conducting fresh interview. 5. However, in the disciplines of Plant Physiology, Horticulture, Agronomy and Plant Breeding and Genetics, W.P.(C) NO.1618 OF 2009 :: 4 :: there are candidates whose applications were rejected as they have above 35 years. Therefore, interview for the said candidates has to be conducted again and rank list revised for making appointment. 6. In the meanwhile, the term of the elected members of the Executive Committee expired. Though the election to the general body is over, the vacancy of elected members in the Executive Committee has not been so far filled up. This was the reason for the delay in completion of the selection process. 7. The University can complete the selection process within a period of four months from today. There is no wilful laches or negligence in this regard.” 7. The petitioners have filed a reply affidavit answering the contentions raised in the statement filed by the University. Relevant portion of the reply affidavit reads as follows: “3) The Kerala Agricultural University Statutes prescribing the qualifications, manner of appointments, salary and allowances, and period of appointment was issued by the Government on 14.2.1972. Rule 2 of the statutes prescribe the procedure for appointment of Professors, Associate Professors and Assistant Professors. The relevant extract of the statute reads as follows: 2. Procedure for appointment:- The following procedure shall be adopted for appointment of Professors, Associate Professors and Assistant Professor. a) The Vice-Chancellor shall have the post advertised specifying the qualifications for appointments and inviting applications therefor. b) The Vice-Chancellor shall constitute the Selection Committee consisting of the following W.P.(C) NO.1618 OF 2009 :: 5 :: members: i) Vice-Chancellor (Chairman) ii) One non-official member of the Executive Committee nominated by the Vice Chancellor. In the absence of non- official members in the Executive Committee one of the Ex-officio members of the Executive Committee may be nominated. iii) Dean of the concerned Faculty. iv) Director of Research or Director of Extension nominated by the Vice Chancellor. v) One expert in the concerned discipline from outside the University from the panel of experts approved by the Executive Committee. c) The Vice-Chancellor shall scrutinise all the applications received and prepare a list of eligible candidates who shall be called for interview. d) After interviewing the candidates the Selection Committee shall prepare the list of persons in the order of merit to be considered for appointment. e) The Vice-Chancellor shall submit the recommendations of the Selection Committee to the Executive Committee for approval and appointment. The list thus approved shall be published. The list shall be valid for 2 years. A look at the above provisions would show that it is the Vice- Chancellor to constitute a select committee and it is not necessary for the Executive Committee to be in existence for the purpose of the preparation of select list. It is true that W.P.(C) NO.1618 OF 2009 :: 6 :: the power of appointment is conferred by the Act on the Executive Committee. Section 42(1) of the Universities Act enables the Executive Committee to make appointment. Preparation of the select list is the prerogative of the selection committee to be appointed by the Vice-Chancellor. The absence of an Executive Committee need not delay the completion of the selection process. This being the position, there is no justification whatsoever on the part of the University in delaying the completion of the selection process. Section 28(6) of the Kerala Agricultural Universities Act empowers the Vice-Chancellor, in case of an emergency, to exercise all of the powers of the Executive Committee. A relevant extract of Section 28(6) of the Kerala Agricultural University Act read as follows: 28(6) The Vice-Chancellor may take any action in any emergency which in his opinion calls for immediate action and shall in such a case and as soon as may be thereafter report the action so taken to the officer or authority who or which would ordinarily have dealt with the matter. All that is required by the Act is to report the action taken by the Vice Chancellor to the Executive Committee. It is respectfully submitted that the reading of the above provision would show that there is no justifiable reason in delaying the publication of the select list for appointment to the post of Assistant Professors.” 8. I am of the view that the mere fact that the term of the elected members of the executive committee expired, is no reason for not conducting the interview and in not finalizing the select list. The University should have complied with the direction in Ext.P5 judgment and should have finalized the select list much earlier. W.P.(C) NO.1618 OF 2009 :: 7 :: Accordingly, the Writ Petition is allowed. The respondents are directed to finalize the select list for appointment to the post of Assistant Professors in the faculties of Horticulture, Agronomy, Plant Physiology and Plant Breeding. The respondents shall address the Vice Chancellor so as to complete the interview within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment and to finalize the select list within a period of fifteen days thereafter. (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/