- (1.) R. A. Sharma, J. U. P. Higher Education Service Commission (here inafter referred to as the Commission) invited applications for the posts of lecturers in various subjects including Economics for various Degree Colleges. Petitioner applied for the post of Lecturer in Economics in pursu ance of the above advertisement; but he was not called for interview. He has, therefore, filed this writ petition for writ of mandamus directing the respondents to permit him to appear before the Interview Board. Further relief for getting the Notification dated 12-10-1988, quashed also been claimed.
(2.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has made three submissions in support of the writ petition, namely, (i) as the petitioner was having minimum eligibility qualifications, the Commission is bound to call him for interview and it is not open to it to exclude him from the interview by short listing the number of candidates, who have applied for the posts ; (ii) criteria adopted by the Commission for short listing the candidates is arbitrary and unfair and (iii) it is not open to amend the statute of the University taking away the discretion of the Selection Committee to relax the minimum eligibility qualifications of suitable candidate. LEARNED counsel for the Commission has disputed the above contentions. All the three contentions are devoid of merit. Supreme Court in Madhya Pradesh Public Service Commission v. Navnit Kumar Poddar, JT 199 (6) SC 302, has held that the Commission has a right to adopt the system of short listing the number of candidates, who applied for the post where selection is to be made only on the basis of interview. It was further held that the process of short-listing does not amount to altering or substituting the eligibility qualifications. Relevant extract from the above decision of the Supreme Court is reproduced below :- "this process of short-listing shall not amount to altering or subs tituting the eligibility criteria given in statutory rules or prospectus. In substance and reality, this process of short listing is part of process of selection. Once the applications are received and the Selection Board or the Commission applies its mind to evolve any rational and reasonable basis, on which the list of applicants should be short listed, the process of selection commences. " The first contention is, therefore, rejected. The second contention also deserves the same fate. It is for the Commission to lay down a fair criteria for short listing the candidates and this Court cannot interfere with such criteria merely because in its view another criteria may be more desirable. This Court can, however, interfere, if it is found that the criteria adopted by the Commission is unfair arbitrary or unreasonable. In the instant case criteria adopted by the Commission for short listing the number of candidates is three first division. Admittedly the petitioner does not have three first division but he holds Ph. D. Degree. A candidate, who has secured three first division can be said to be a man of outstanding calibre. Selection of a candidate having outstanding academic record ensures selection of a reasonably good teacher.
(3.) THE contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner to the effect that any criteria, which ignores the research degree or the teaching experience cannot be said to be fair and reasonable, cannot be accepted for two reasons, namely, (i) it is for the Commission to lay down the criteria for short listing the candidates and this Court cannot interfere with it unless it suffers from manifest error of law. In the instant case that is not the position. Criteria adopted by the Commission reasonably insures selection of a reasonably good teacher ; and (ii) mere possession of a research degree by a candidate without good academic record is not desirable because of the falling standard of the education. In this connection a Division Bench of this Court in Hari Shanker v. Vice-Chancellor, Writ Petition No. 6403 of 1990, decided on 14-12-1995 has laid down as under : "the teachers who are selected for the affiliated Colleges are requir ed to teach students of Bachelor's and Master's degree courses. While taking class they are not only required to teach but are also required to control and maintain discipline amongst the students in the classes. For performing their duties effectively, over all good academic record and performance is necessary. When the educational standard is falling gradually, making appointment of teachers merely on the basis of research degree without good academic record may not be desirable. Qualifica tion of consistently good academic record ensures the appoint ment of a fairly good teacher. " As regards the teaching experience it may be mentioned that in this State officiating and ad hoc appointments of the teachers have been made from time to time, because the Commission was not able to complete the selection process for various reasons beyond its control. Appointments of such teachers are not always made on the basis of merit. When the object is to select a teacher of outstanding merit, the teaching experience of ad hoc officiating teacher without outstanding academic record can hardly have any relevance. The decision of the Division Bench in Anil Kumar v. University of Gorakhpur, (1983) 2 UPLBEC 1369, on which reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner is of no help to him for two reasons, firstly in this case the question of short listing was not involved ; and secondly one of the eligibility criteria for lecturer of law prescribed therein was consistently good academic record, which was defined as 55% marks in LL. B. Degree Examination and second class in any other Bachelor's Degree Examination or 50% marks in each of the two examinations separately. No credit was given to the entire career of the candidate. This Court while declaring the above provisions as arbitrary held as under :- "it is true that the person who is going to be appointed as Lecturer in Law he should have consistently good academic record because that shows his keen interest in academic pursuit but this has to be taken after considering his entire career as student and. it cannot be confined solely on the basis of the marks obtained by such applicant in Bachelor's degree examination," In the instant case that is not the position.;