- (1.) VINEET Saran, J. The Director of Administration and Monitoring, Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture and Technology, Kanpur, appointed the appellant on 25-8-1987 on daily wages for imparting instructions in Fine Arts and Crafts. He continued to work on daily wages and thereafter by an order dated 13-12-1992; he was appointed on such post under Para 10 of Chapter XIII of the Statutes of the Chandra Shekhar Azad University of Agriculture and Technology, Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as the Statutes ). As per the terms of appointment, the services of the petitioner were purely temporary and were terminable at any time without issuing any show cause notice. By an order dated 29-9-1995 passed by the Chancellor of the University, the appointment of the appellant was annulled as having been made contrary to the provisions of Para 3 of Chapter XIII of the Statute. The said order was passed on the representation of one Rakesh Kumar after affording adequate opportunity of showing cause to the petitioner. Challenging the aforesaid order of the Chancellor, the appellant filed Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 31154 of 1995 which was dismissed by the Judgment and Order dated 15-11-1995 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court. Aggrieved by the aforesaid Judgment, the appellant has preferred this appeal.
(2.) THE contention of Sri Raj Kumar Jain, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the writ petitioner- appellant is that the appellant having been appointed under Para 10 of Chapter XIII of the Statutes, the provisions of Para 3 of Chapter XIII would not be applicable and as such the order passed by the Chancellor was illegal. For ready reference the relevant Paragraphs of Chapter XIII of the Statutes are being reproduced below: "chapter XIIi APPOINTMENT OF STAFf (1) (a) All appointments shall be made strictly on the basis of merit. (b ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (c ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (d ). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2) Appointments to the various categories of posts in the University shall be made as herein after prescribed. (3) No selection for any appointment under these Statutes shall be made except after advertisement of the vacancy in atleast three newspapers having adequate circulation in the country. 4 to 9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (10) Appointments of all other staff not specifically provided for in the Act or these Statutes, shall be made by the Kulpati with the approval of the Board except the following posts which may be filled by the Kulpati without reference to the Board, namely; (a) THE non-teaching posts carrying a scale the maximum of which does not exceed Rs. 1,250/- including those which are filled by obtaining services of a person on deputation for a period up to three years from a regularly constituted service of State or Central Government or an autonomous body constituted by the State or Central Government. THE upper limit of Rs. 1,250/- will be subject to alteration, from time to time, by the resolutions of the Board of Manager, on the basis of rationalization or enhancement occurring, on the basis of the decision of the Government. (b) THE posts for which the Kulpati is the appointing authority under the provisions of the Act. " The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that there would be a distinction between the "selection for any appointment" as provided in para 3 and "appointment" as in para 10. According to Sri Jain "selection for appointment" is through a Selection Committee and for such appointments, the Selection Committee is to be constituted which has been provided for in paragraphs 4 to 9 of Chapter XIII of the Statutes and the provision of Para 3 of Chapter XIII of the Statutes which provides that "no selection for any appointment under these Statutes shall be made except after advertisement of the vacancies in atleast three newspapers" would be applicable to only those posts where a Selection Committee has to be constituted for making such appointments. According to him the appointments made under Para 10 of Chapter XIII of the Statutes are by the Kulpati (Vice Chancellor) with or without approval of the Board, depending on the post on which the appointment is to be made. It has thus been contended that the provision of Para 3 for advertising the vacancies in atleast three newspapers would not be applicable in the case of the appointments made by the Vice Chancellor under Para 10 of Chapter XIII of the Statutes which would not require such procedure to be followed. Sri Jain submitted that since the appointment of the writ petitioner- appellant was admittedly made under Para 10 of Chapter XIII of the Statutes, the order of the Chancellor cancelling the appointment of the writ petitioner-appellant on the ground of non compliance of Para 3 of Chapter XIII of the Statutes as well as the order of the writ Court dismissing the writ petition, were bad and liable to be set aside. Dr. R. G. Padia, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent-University, submitted that since all the appointments were to be made strictly on the basis of merit, the procedure dealing with the appointments as laid down in Para 3 would be applicable to all the appointments, whether they were to be made through a selection committee or directly by the Vice Chancellor of the University.
(3.) WE have heard learned counsel for the parties as well as perused the record and the relevant Statutes. WE are unable to accept the submissions of Sri Jain, learned counsel for the appellant. In our view, there is no justifiable reason for interference with the order of the learned Single Judge or that of the Chancellor of the University. The appointments of the staff of the University are governed by the provisions of Chapter XIII of the Statutes. As per Para 1 (a), all appointments are to be made strictly on the basis of merit. Para 2 clearly provides that all appointments in the various categories of posts in the University are to be made as per the procedure prescribed in Chapter XIII. In our opinion, the procedure for selection for appointment as laid down in para 3 would be applicable for all posts and it strictly provides that no selection for any appointment under the Statutes shall be made without advertisement of the vacancy in atleast three newspapers having adequate circulation. The admitted position is that the University did not advertise the vacancy before the letter of appointment was issued to the writ petitioner-appellant by the Vice Chancellor. In our view Paras 4 to 9 of Chapter XIII of the Statutes provide for appointment of certain posts for which the selection is to be made through a duly constituted Selection Committee. Selection is only a process for appointment. The appointments which are to be made under Para 10 of Chapter XIII of the Statutes do not require that any Selection Committee be constituted for the remaining posts which are not specifically provided for in the Act or the Statutes, and appointment to such posts are to be made by the Vice Chancellor. The same cannot be read to mean that the appointments under Para 10 can be made without following any procedure. Para 10 being a part of Chapter XIII of the Statutes, any appointment made under the said Para would also be governed by the procedure prescribed under Para 3 of the said Chapter relating to appointment of staff of the University. The appointments, if allowed to be made without advertisement of the vacancy, would encourage back door entry as well as partiality and favouritism and the same would be against the spirit of the Statutes. Since under the Statutes, merit is the main criteria for all appointments, the same can be best selected by open competition which is possible only when there is proper publicity of the vacancy through advertisement. Even if the procedure for advertisement had not been provided for in the Statutes, still for the proper selection on merits, wide publicity of the vacancy would in any case be a necessity and advertisement in the newspaper having adequate circulation is the best mode for achieving such object. Para 10 of Chapter XIII of the Statutes cannot be segregated from other Paragraphs of Chapter XIII so as to mean that the appointment on the post under Para 10 can be made without following the procedure of selection for appointment as provided under Para 3 of Chapter XIII of the Statutes. The impugned orders having been passed on the basis of non compliance of the procedure prescribed under para 3 in making the appointment of the petitioner, are wholly justified and liable to be confirmed.;