1 ASWP-9427-2010 srk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.9427 OF 2010 Sudhir Sopan Waghmare and ors. ...Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents Mr.Mihir Desai for petitioners. Ms.Neha Bhide, `B’ Panel Advocate for respondent no.1. Mr.R.A.Rodrigues for respondent no.2. Mr.C.G.Gavnekar for Respondent nos.3 and 4. CORAM: B. H. MARLAPALLE & SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. August 23, 2011. P.C. 1. In this petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution, the petitioners pray for writ of mandamus or an order in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent no.2 – University to accord and grant 2 ASWP-9427-2010 permanent approval to their appointment on the basis of their qualifications and experience of teaching with the respondent no.3 – college. They also pray for quashing and setting aside the advertisement released by respondent no.3 – college in the weekly newspaper “University News” dated 30th August-5th September 2010. As per the petitioners their qualification details and date of appointment as a Lecturer are as under: Sr.No. Name Qualifications Appointment in the academic year 1 Sudhir Sopan Waghmare MA, B.Ed., M.Phil. 2005-06 2 Navnath Sopan Gaikwad M.Com, M.Phil. 2006-07 3 Satish Devidas Tanpure M.A., M.Phil. 2009-10 2. The respondent no.3 – College had forwarded their proposals for approval on 15/3/2010 to the respondent no.2 – University and the said proposal was accepted by the University and temporary approval was granted for the respective academic years. However, the respondent no.4 – Society published an advertisement inviting applications for the post of 3 ASWP-9427-2010 Lecturer in Business Economics, Commerce and Economics which posts are held by the petitioners. Respondent nos. 3 and 4 in their affidavit in reply have stated that the UGC has changed the eligibility criteria on or around 11/7/2009 and it has been now stipulated that the candidates with NET / SET qualifications are only eligible to be appointed as Lecturers in the Degree Colleges. Similar notification was issued in the year 2006 as well. The respondent no.2 has filed affidavit in reply and opposed the petition. It has been pointed out that the appointments of the petitioners during the relevant period and for each of the academic years were approved on temporary basis because they were selected by the Local Selection Committee and they did not undergo the regular selection process conducted by the University Selection Committee. Under Statute No.417(i) the appointments made by Local Selection Committee as per Statute No.417(iii) of the University are approved on temporary basis, and these appointments were approved only upto the academic year 2009-2010. Thereafter the UGC published a notification dated 11/7/2009 setting out the regulations for appointment of the teachers and the same was published in the Government of India gazette dated 11th July 2009. It has been pointed out that since the petitioners do not possess NET / SET qualifications, they are not eligible for being appointed as Lecturers and 4 ASWP-9427-2010 they cannot claim benefit of past service as they were appointed on the basis of selection made by the Local Selection Committee. 3. The petitioners in support of their claim seek to rely upon a decision of this Court (Nagpur Bench) in Writ Petition No.1489 of 2010 and connected petitions dated 2/7/2010. In the said decision the Division Bench of this Court held that 11/7/2009 was the cut off date for the essential qualifications prescribed for the post of Lecturer and if the selection process had commenced prior to the said date, the qualifications of NET / SET would not be applicable to the Lecturers who were selected in such a selection process and the notification dated 11/7/2009 issued by the UGC will have a prospective application. Admittedly in the cases decided by the Nagpur Bench all the petitioners were selected by the University Selection Committee and none of them was appointed by the Local Selection Committee. Hence the petitioners cannot rely upon the decision in the case of Writ Petition No.1489 of 2010, as they have been appointed by the local selection committee. 4. Once the University Grants Commission has prescribed the qualifications for the post of Lecturer and the petitioners do not meet the 5 ASWP-9427-2010 said requirements of qualifications viz. NET / SET, they cannot challenge the decision taken by the University asking the respondent – college to initiate the process of recruitment of duly qualified Lecturers. The petitioners being not eligible for the post of Lecturer, have no vested right to the post advertised in the impugned advertisement and they cannot seek directions against the University for granting approval to regularise their service as Lecturers. Unqualified candidates who were appointed on temporary basis by the local committee cannot claim equality and seek a mandamus. 5. Hence this petition must fail at the threshold and the same is hereby rejected summarily. (SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.) (B. H. MARLAPALLE, J.)