- (1.) IN the Aligarh Muslim University, an advertisement No. 2 A/97-98 dated 16th August, 1997 was issued inviting applications for appointment to a large number of posts including the post of Reader in Arabian Studies, Department of Islamic Studies and Reader in Iranian Studies, Department of Islamic Studies. These vacancies can be found at item No. 19 and 20 of the said advertisement, a copy of which has been enclosed as Annexure 1 to this writ petition.
(2.) THE qualification prescribed for the posts of Reader in the advertisement read as follows : "qualification.- Essential Good academic record with a Doctoral Degree or equivalent published work. Candidates from outside the University system in addition shall also possess at least 55% marks or an equivalent grade at the Master's degree level. Eight years experience of teaching and/or Research including upto three years for research degrees and has made some mark in the areas of Scholarship as evidenced by quality or publications, contribution to educational renovation, Resign of new courses and curricula. NOTE : (For post at S. No. 19 & 20) M. A. , Ph. D. , shall be in Islamic studies. Desirable : Knowledge of Arabic/persian/turkish". It will be noticed that for the posts in question, the advertisement clearly prescribed that the Post Graduation and Doctorate has to be in Islamic Studies. It is quite obvious that if the person is being appointed a teacher in a particular subject, he must be educated in that subject. A person not educated in the relevant subject is not likely to be able to teach properly howsoever meritorious he may be in other fields. It must also be remembered that the purpose of appointing the teachers in academic bodies like, the University is primarily intended for the benefit of the students. In this backdrop, we have to examine the validity of the appointment of respondent No. 4 to the post of Reader in the Arabian Studies in the Department of Islamic Studies. The challenge has been made by the two petitioners of this writ petition on the ground that the respondent No. 4 had his Masters Degree as well as Doctorate in Political Science, which is nowhere even close to Islamic Studies.
(3.) THE challenge is sought to be resisted by the University as well as the respondent No. 4 on the ground that the petitioner No. 1 cannot now maintain this writ petition as the petitioner No. 1 has been appointed as Professor vide Office Memo dated 3rd June, 2004. Having been appointed Professor more than two years ago, even if the appointment of the respondent No. 4 is quashed by this Court and the post of Reader is re-advertised, there should be no occasion on part of the petitioner No. 1 to apply for that post now. So far as the petitioner No. 2 is concerned, it has been submitted by the contesting respondents that the petitioner No. 2 had applied as a rival candidate for the same post on which the respondent No. 4 has been appointed i. e. , the Reader in Arabian Studies, but the petitioner No. 2 failed to turn up before the Selection Committee and has, therefore, no right to challenge the selection of respondent No. 4.;