JUDGEMENT
PRASENJIT MANDAL, J. -
(1.) THIS application is at the instance
of the wards of the retired employees of the Burdwan
University and is filed for issuance of a writ of
mandamus commanding the respondents for revoking,
cancelling or withdrawing the letter dated September 27,
2012 issued by the Registrar, Burdwan University and other consequential reliefs.
(2.) THE petitioners have contended that the respondent university published an advertisement dated February 10, 2009 for recruitment to the different posts as described
in the Advertisement No.4 of 2008/09 of the respondent
university. The petitioners applied for different posts
and some of them got the admit card for the written
tests. But, the petitioner no.s 2 & 4 were not given the
admit cards due to over age.
The petitioners have contended that by the
Notification dated November 6, 1989, the then Registrar
of the respondent university issued orders to the effect
that the wards of the employees who will retire on
superannuation within five years or have already retired
during the last three years and have rendered at least 20
years of service at the University shall get a weightage
in the matter of appointment in the University provided
that the wards have the requisite qualification for
appointment to the concerned posts and they qualify in
the normal process of selection.
Previously, a litigation was held being W.P. No.4380(W) of 1995 wherein it has been decided that the
said notification was a policy decision in respect of the
employment of the wards and so, the university was
directed to consider the policy decision in accordance
with law, by the order dated July 26, 1996.
The petitioners filed a writ petition being W.P.
No.14396(W) of 2010 which was disposed of on June 5, 2012
directing the respondent university and the concerned
office bearers to treat the writ petition as a
representation of the writ petitioners and to dispose of
the same by a reasoned order in accordance with law.
Pursuant to that order, the Registrar passed the
impugned order. Being aggrieved by such order, this
application has been preferred.
(3.) NOW , the question is whether the order passed by the Registrar suffers from arbitrariness and violation of
Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and
on going through the materials on record, I am of the
view that the concerned Registrar of the respondent
university has taken a right approach in compliance with
the order dated June 5, 2012 passed by this Hon'ble Court
in W.P. No.14396(W) of 2010.
It is pertinent to mention that while disposing of
said writ petition, the learned Single Judge did not go
into the merit of the application and simply directed to
consider the representation of the petitioners.
While complying with the said direction, the
Registrar has observed that the petitioners do not come
at all within the requirement of the notification dated
November 6, 1989 for the respondent university and he has
assigned reasons in support of his findings. Not only
that, in my view, he has taken a right decision by
expressing that the benefits to be given to the wards of
the employee is nothing but a clear violation of right to
equality and so, the respondent university did not choose
to follow the said Notification of 1989.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.