CWP No. 18999 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 18999 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision: 16.07.2010 Ridamjit Kaur & Ors. ...Petitioners Vs. Panjab University & Ors. ...Respondents CORAM Hon'ble Mr.Justice Vinod K.Sharma Present: Mr.H.C.Arora, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr.Himmat Singh, Advocate, for respondents No.1 and 2. Mr.Raman Sharma, Advocate, for respondents No.3 and 4. --- Vinod K.Sharma, J . (Oral) CM No.8876 of 2010 Allowed. Written statement taken on record. CWP No.18999 of 2009 The petitioners have invoked the writ jurisdiction of this court under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ in the CWP No. 18999 of 2009 2 nature of certiorari for quashing the selection of respondents No.3 and 4 as Assistant Professor in Forensic Physical Science and Forensic Chemical Science, respectively in the Institute of Forensic Science and Criminology of Panjab University. Ground for challenging the selection of respondents No.3 and 4, as pleaded in the writ petition is, that the respondents did not possess the qualification of NET, in the related subject of Forensic Science and Criminology from University Grants Commission. The petitioners in support of the plea raised placed reliance on the advertisement Annexure P.1, wherein the qualification prescribed for being appointed as Assistant Professor in Forensic Physical Science and Forensic Chemical Science was as under: “(a) Good academic record with at least 55% of marks of or an equivalent grade be in the 7 point scale at the Master's degree level in the relevant subject. (b) NET/SLET is the minimum requirement. However, a person holding Ph.D Degree is exempted from minimum requirement of NET/SLET.” `` The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners, therefore, was that reading of the advertisement shows that qualification of NET/SLET was mandatory qualifications which the respondents No.3 and 4 did not possess . CWP No. 18999 of 2009 3 On issuance of notice of motion, written statement has been filed on behalf of respondents No.3 and 4, wherein besides raising preliminary objection with regard to the maintainability of the writ petition, on merit it is asserted that the qualification of NET/SLET was exempted in case the candidates having Ph.D. Degree. The fact that respondents No.3 and 4 hold the degree of Ph.D. is not disputed by the petitioners, as in the writ petition both the respondents No.3 and 4 have been described as Dr.Vishal Sharma and Dr.(Ms) Shweta, meaning thereby that they hold degree of Ph.D. The contention of the petitioners that respondents No.3 and 4 did not have the requisite qualification, therefore, cannot be sustained in law. No other point was pressed or raised. No merit. Dismissed. (Vinod K.Sharma) 16.07.2010 Judge rp