- (1.) We have heard the petitioner in person and the learned Counsel for the respondents at length and perused the paper-book.
(2.) The petitioner is a candidate for the post of Reader in Pharmacognosy, in response to Advertisement No. 6/2005 dated 1.6.2005 (Annexure P-1), issued by the respondent-University. The qualifications prescribed in the advertisement (Annexure P-1) are as follows: Advertisement No. 6/2005 Applications are invited for the following posts in the U.G.C. grades so as to reach the Deputy Registrar (Estt.), Punjab University, Chandigarh, by 30.6.2005. READERS, in the following Departments/Centres: University Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences-3 Pharmacognosy-l ESSENTIAL Ph.D. degree with 1st class degree at Bachelor's and Master's level in Pharmacognosy with basic degree in Pharmacy (B. Pharmacy). EXPERIENCE: 5 years experience in teaching/industry research at the level of lecturer or equivalent. Qualifications & experience far candidate from industry and profession. Candidate from Industry/Profession with First Class Master's degree in Pharmacognosy and Professional work which is significant and can be recognised as equivalent to Ph.D. degree and with 5 years experience would also be eligible. Desirable Experience of teaching the subject to postgraduate classes and guiding research at doctoral level. The petitioner had submitted at the first hearing that the qualifications advertised by Annexure P-1 i.e. First Class degree at Bachelor's level as a part of essential qualifications, is contrary to the qualifications laid down by the All India Council of Technician Education in the Notification issued with regard to the revised Pay Scales and Service Conditions for Degree Level Institutions, Year 2000. In the aforesaid Notification, the requisite qualification for the post in question is Ph.D. degree with First Class either at Master's or Bachelor's level. The petitioner had passed the Master's Degree in Pharmacognosy with First Division in the year 1989. The essential qualifications had been laid down by the University only to show favour to Dr. (Mrs.) Maninder Karan, respondent No. 4 at the instance of her husband who is working in the Department of Pharmacy in the Punjab University. The petitioner had earlier challenged the appointment of Dr. (Mrs.) Maninder Karan in C.W.P. No. 17332 of 2001 which was disposed of on 11.7.2001. The respondents had been directed to decide the legal notice dated 11.7.2001 by passing a speaking order. The petitioner complains that the respondents have not passed any speaking order in obedience to the order passed by this Court on 11.7.2001. On the basis of these submissions, notice of motion was issued to the respondents-University.
(3.) Detailed reply has been filed. The respondent-University has attached order dated 19.9.2002 passed by the Vice Chancellor (Annexure R1/9). Mr. Gupta submits that the entire matter has been considered and the claim of the petitioner was not accepted. The appointment of respondent No. 4 was upheld by the Vice Chancellor. With regard to the qualifications, it is stated that there is no deviation from the qualifications prescribed by the Syndicate of the Punjab University in its meeting held on 29.1.2005. The qualifications prescribed by the Syndicate clearly provided that a candidate who does not belong to any Industry or Profession, must possess Ph.D. degree with 1st class degree at Bachelor's and Master's level in Pharmacognosy with basic degree in Pharmacy (B. Pharmacy). This qualification has been mentioned as the essential qualification in the advertisement challenged by the petitioner. The term "essential qualification" means the qualification "necessary" or "requisite" for the post, failing which, a candidate is ineligible for the post. The petitioner, however, claims to be eligible as a candidate from Industry/Profession which, according to the petitioner, is required to have First Class Master's degree in Pharmacognosy and with 5 years experience. Mr. Gupta submits that the aforesaid qualification is limited to candidates bona fide belonging to Industry/Profess ion. It would not be applicable in the case of Government Employees. The petitioner admittedly was working as a Drug Inspector in the Department of Health, Government of Haryana. Merely because the petitioner took leave from his employment to pursue Ph.D qualification would not permit the petitioner to claim that he belongs to either Industry or Profession. The petitioner, therefore, cannot claim to be a candidate coming from Industry/Profession. His candidature would have to be considered among candidates not belonging to Industry/Profession. In the aforesaid category, the essential qualifications would be Ph.D degree with 1st Class at Bachelor's as well as Master's level. The petitioner does not possess 1st Class degree at Bachelor's level. Consequently, he was ineligible to be considered for the post.;