IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 22ND AUGUST 2008 / 31ST SRAVANA 1930 WA.No. 1984 of 2007(Y) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.19598/2006 Dated 06/11/2006 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ----------------------------- DR.G.S.L.H.V. PRASAD RAO, PROFESSOR, COLLEGE OF HORTICULTURE, VELLANIKARA. BY ADV. SRI.R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI SMT.SABINA JAYAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------ 1. THE KERALA AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, KAU, POST VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR. 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, KERALA AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY, K.A.U. POST, VELLANIKKARA, THRISSUR. 3. DR. P.K.RAJEEVAN, ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR, DEPARTMENT OF POMOLOGY & FLORICULTURE, COLLEGE OF HORTICULTURE, VELLAYANI, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.RENJITH THAMPAN,SC,KERALA AGRL.UTY FOR R1 & 2 SRI.THOMAS ANTONY FOR R3 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/08/2008, ALONG WITH WA NO. 1992 OF 2007,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ. ------------------------------- W.A.NOS.1984 & 1992 OF 2007 () ----------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of August, 2008 J U D G M E N T KOSHY,J. The writ petitioner in W.P.(C).No.19598/2006 is the senior most Professor in the Kerala Agricultural University. As per Ext.P5 seniority list, his seniority number is No.2. First one has already retired. As per Ext.P5 seniority list, the 3rd respondent is placed as No.12. Writ Petitioner in W.P.(C). No.24221/2006 is placed as No.13. According to the writ petitioner in W.P.(C).No.24221/2006, taking into consideration the date of appointment, he is also senior to the 4th respondent, who is the 3rd respondent in the other writ petition. On 10.7.2003, the writ petitioner in W.P.(C). No.19598/2006 was placed in full additional charge of as Associate Dean of the College of Horticulture. Since he was not having basic qualification in Agriculture or Horticulture, there was protest from the students and teachers. Following W.A.1984 & 1992/07 2 the protest, he was removed and 3rd respondent was put in charge as the Associate Dean and that was challenged before this Court. The appointment of the 3rd respondent was set aside as appointment cannot be made on the basis of agitation and the University was directed to make proper appointment. The Executive Committee's decision was that the 'senior most teacher at the College of Horticulture is to be replaced the present Associate Dean'. It is the contention of the petitioner that the 3rd respondent, though not the senior most teacher, he was again appointed by the Executive Committee by Ext.P5 order. Ext.P5 order shows that the senior most 20 teachers were considered and 3rd respondent was selected. It is also pointed out by the counsel for the University that all the senior most teachers were considered and Executive Committee selected the 3rd respondent. The 3rd respondent possessed Masters Degree in Horticulture apart from Ph.D in the same subject. Petitioners in both writ petitions possessed Masters Degree in Meteorology and Agriculture and Bio-Chemistry respectively. This aspect was considered by the W.A.1984 & 1992/07 3 Court and held that the decision of the Executive Committee's to replace the petitioner cannot be faulted. What was decided is only that the substitute should not be appointed on the basis of agitation. Now the Executive Committee has decided to appoint the 3rd respondent in the College of Horticulture. If the Executive Committee's decision that a person having Degree in the Horticulture itself should be appointed as the Associate Dean of the College of Horticulture, it cannot be fault. It is argued that even though Academic Council has proposed to amend the ordinance making it compulsory that only the person having basic Degree in the practical subject can be posted as the Associate Dean, it was not so far approved by the Chancellor even though General Council has approved the same. The matter is still pending with the Chancellor and only Chancellor will decide when the ordinance will come into effect. But even without the amendment of the ordinance, the Executive Committee found that a senior most teacher with the basic Degree in Horticulture to be preferred to be appointed as Associate W.A.1984 & 1992/07 4 Dean, though there is teacher who is having basic degree in other subjects. We are not interfering with the decision of the Executive Committee and persons without having basic degree in the particular field should not be appointed as an Associate Dean in the College of Horticulture. In these circumstances, we see no ground to interfere with the appointment of the 3rd respondent, and hence, we dismiss the appeal. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE prp J.B.KOSHY & K.P.BALACHANDRAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO. OF 2006 () --------------------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T --------------------------------------------------------- 4th August, 2008