ARINDAM SINHA,J. - (1.) This writ petition has been heard. Prima facie view of Court that Employment Notification dated 16th February, 2010, disclosed and relied upon by petitioner, being genuine has been assailed by Mr. Chakraborty, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the University. Record of submissions in order dated 20th July, 2018 are relevant as made on behalf of petitioner. "Mr. Bhattacharya, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitioner and submits, his client is entitled to relief. Referring to page 71 of writ petition he demonstrates, service condition advertised by the university included following clauses nos. 8 and 9 under general instructions to candidates. "8. The candidates who have been presently serving in the same scale of pay will be entitled to get at least six additional increments. 9. Regarding age of retirement and other conditions of service the First Registrar and First Controller of Examinations will be guided by the Rules and Regulations and Ordinances to be made by the University. However, the candidates who have been presently serving in the same scale of pay will be considered for extension of service upto sixty five years after the expiry of the period of his office." At this juncture there is interruption by both Mr. Mukherjee, learned advocate, Additional Government Pleader appearing on behalf of State and Mr. Chakraborty, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the University. They submit in unision, this advertised notification has been fabricated by petitioner. No such general instructions to candidates, as would appear from extracted clauses, were advertised. Mr. Mukherjee refers to his client's affidavit and seeks to demonstrate, advertised notification relied upon by petitioner is genuine. Mr. Bhattacharya refers to connected application CAN 1570 of 2017 made by his client. Page 42 of the application is copy of letter dated 4th November, 2016 addressed by officiating Vice-Chancellor to former Vice-Chancellor of the University. It would be sufficient to extract therefrom the following. "In the Web Employment Notification no. 01/VC/Adv/2010 dated 16.02.2010 under 'General Instructions to the Candidates' in serial number 8 and 9 it was mentioned that additional six increments and extension of service up to sixty five (65) years after the expiry of the period of service will be offered to the selected candidate. Sir, you are requested to kindly inform me whether Web Employment Notification was published with these clauses by you or not? If yes, then whether instructions mentioned in serial number 8 and 9 were discussed in the Selection Committee's meeting held on 29.03.2010 for the appointment of the First Registrar? May I please get a copy of the Selection Committee's recommendation if the same is available with you?" He then refers to reply of former Vice-Chancellor who, according to him, had authorised publication of advertised notification his client is replying on. Here too it will be sufficient to extract the following. "Regarding Web Employment Notification No. 01/VC/Adv./2010 dated 16.02.2010 under 'General Instructions to the Candidates' in serial number 8 and 9 were mentioned by the undersigned so that better candidate having experience to run College/University administration might be selected. In absence of Ordinances Notification No. F.1-22/97-U.I. dated 06.11.1998, F.3-1/94 (PS) dated 24.12.1998 and Appendix 1, MHRD, Govt. of India, Department of Education were followed in this respect (Annexure-v)"."
(2.) On 26th July, 2018 Mr. Chakraborty had submitted Employment Notification dated 16th February, 2010, relied upon by petitioner, is a manufactured document. Law did permit offer of service conditions as made in that advertisement and said to have been made by then Vice-Chancellor. Referring to disclosure at page 69, in affidavit-in-opposition of the University filed in the writ petition Mr. Chakrarborty had submitted, employment notification was as per particulars below. "Employment Notification no.- 01/Reg/Adv/2010 dated 16th February, 2010."
(3.) Petitioner's manufactured document alleges particulars of such notification as per disclosure in page 69 of the writ petition as follows. "Employment Notification no.- 01/Vc/Adv/2010 dated 16th February, 2010.";