IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL WPSB No. 209 of 2007 Dr. V. Devadas S/o Sri S. Veruvel R/o 134/I, Vikas Nagar, IIT Campus Roorkee, District Haridwar. ……Petitioner Versus 1. Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, Haridwar through its Registrar. 2. Director, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, Haridwar. 3. Dean, Faculty Affairs, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, District Haridwar. 4. Deputy Registrar, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, District Haridwar. 5. Prof. R. Sankar (former Head of Department and worked as Head of the Department till December 31, 2006), presently working as Professor in Architecture and Planning Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, District Haridwar. 6. Prof. S.Y. Kulkarni, presently working as Head of the Department and Professor in Architecture and Planning Department, Indian Institute of Technology, Rookee, District Haridwar ………Respondents. Shri Pankaj Miglani, Advocate present for the petitioner. Shri Vipul Sharma, Advocate present for the respondent Nos. 1,2,3 & 4. Dated: Nainital: the 17th Day of November, 2009. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Hon’ble Alok Singh, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned report dated 31.05.2007 made by the Selection Committee in respect of selection for the post of Professor, Architecture and Planning in Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent No. 5 R. Shankar, and respondent No. 6 S.Y. Kulkarni were not happy with the petitioner, as such the impugned selection is biased and suffers with malice. He further contended that the members who interviewed the petitioner were not the qualified persons, having the Ph.D degree. 4. On behalf of the respondents, attention of this Court is drawn to regulation 13(3)(a) of status of the Institute which reads as Under:- Status 13(3)(a):- In the case of posts of Professor and equivalent posts in scientific, Design and Computer staff cadres, the Selection Committee shall consists of following members, namely:- (i) The Director - Chairman (ii) One nominee of the visitor - Member (iii) Two nominees of the Board, One being an expert, but Other than a member Of the Board. - Members (iv) One expert, other than a Member of the Senate, Nominated by the Senate - Member 5. It is contended on behalf of the respondents that the interviews were held as per the status and the allegations of malice are false. At the end of para 24, it has been stated that apart from the Director of Indian Institute of Technology, Roorkee, the Selection Board consisted of Prof. Subir Saha (Visitor’s Nominee), Shri K.T. Gurmukhi (Board’s Nominees), Shri M.N. Johlekar(Board’s Nominee) and Prof. Kulbhushan Jain (Senate’s Nominee). 6. Learned counsel for the petitioner failed to show us that that members of board were required to hold the degree of Ph.D Apart from this, the copy of Annexure SA-1 to the supplementary affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioner, itself shows that no one was selected in the interview for the post for which the petitioner appeared as a candidate. 7. It is pertinent to mention here that we are not the expert body of assess the suitability of the candidates. 8. For the reasons as discussed above, we do not find any force in this writ petition as the Selection Committee report does not appears to be in violation of any statutory rule, nor does it appears that if suffers from malice. 9. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed summarily at the admission stage. (Alok Singh, J.) (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) 17.11.2009 Ravi