D.N. Patel, J. - (1.) This Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred against judgment and order dated 26th August, 2015 delivered by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 2192 of 2013, whereby, the petition preferred by the original petitioner has been dismissed and the relief, as sought for, by the petitioner has not been granted and the matter was remanded to the State Government for re-considering the facts. The original petitioner being aggrieved and dissatisfied by the said order, preferred this Letters Patent Appeal. Factual Matrix: Public advertisement was issued by the respondent-State authorities bearing Advertisement No. 8 of 2007 dated 22 June, 2007 with corrigendum dated 28th July 2007 for the post of Assistant Professor in the stream of Electrical Engineering. In the year 2007, the qualification required was Master Degree in technical qualification and five years of teaching experience at the time of application. This appellant (original petitioner) was already serving as a Lecturer in J.S.S. Academy of Technical Education, Noida, has applied for the post of Assistant Professor in the stream of Electrical Engineering. This appellant (original petitioner) passed through the necessary tests including viva-voice test and, ultimately, this appellant was recommended by the Jharkhand Public Service Commission (hereinafter to be referred to as J.P.S.C. for the sake of brevity) for the appointment to the post of Assistant Professor in Electrical Engineering on 07.09.2011 (Annexure 3 to the memo of this L.P.A) The State Government issued a notification for appointment of several candidates on 18th March, 2013 (Annexure 5), including this appellant (original petitioner) who is at Serial no. 15 to the said annexure. Thus, the appellant (original petitioner) was appointed as Assistant Professor (formerly known as Lecturer). This designation is in dispute because this appellant applied for the post of Assistant Professor which is now renamed as Associate Professor and, therefore, he should have been appointed as Associate Professor for which a writ petition has been preferred bearing W.P.(S) No. 2192 of 2013. It further appears from the facts of the case that the advertisement was published on 22nd June, 2007 and after the whole selection process is over and also after the recommendation dated 07.09.2011 ( Annexure 3 to the memo of this L.P.A) made by the J.P.S.C for appointment in the year 2011, this appellant was actually appointed in the year 2013. The Jharkhand State adopted the recommendation of the All India Council for Technical Education (hereinafter to be referred to as AICTE for the sake of brevity) dated 05.03.2010 on 31st March, 2012. Thus, the aforesaid recommendation of AICTE dated 05.03.2010 which was adopted by the State of Jharkhand on 31st March, 2012 is to the effect that now onwards, for the post of Associate Professor, Ph.D Degree from the date of application is must whereas, previously, Ph.D degree was to be obtained within a period of seven years from the date of appointment. This appellant (original petitioner) acquired the higher qualification of Ph.D on 07.05.2014 i.e. within a period of seven years from the date of his appointment - March, 2013. Thus, as per earlier rules prevailing as on the date of advertisement on 22nd June, 2007, this appellant (original petitioner) who had applied for the post of Assistant Professor and who was otherwise also qualified for the post of Associate Professor, should have been appointed as Associate Professor, as per the claim of this appellant. Earlier post of Lecturer, Assistant Professor and Professor are now renamed as Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor. Thus, those who were earlier entitled for the post of Assistant Professor should now be posted as Associate Professor. The new rules for having Ph.D degree from the very inception for the post of Associate Professor, are not applicable to the advertisement no. 8 of 2007 because under that advertisement, the selection process was already completed. The rules of selection cannot be altered after the selection process has already been commenced. Here, not only selection process has been commenced, but, it has also been completed. Hence, this appellant preferred a writ petition bearing W.P.(S) no. 2192 of 2013, but, the same was not allowed. As such, being aggrieved and feeling dissatisfied by the judgment and order dated 26th August, 2015, passed by the learned single judge in W.P.(S) No. 2192 of 2013, this Letters Patent Appeal has been preferred by the appellant.
(2.) Arguments canvassed by counsel for the appellant: (i) This appellant (original petitioner) had applied for the post of Assistant Professor in pursuance of the public advertisement no. 8 of 2007 dated 22nd June, 2007, who was selected for the said post and, ultimately, recommendations were made by the J.P.S.C. on 07.09.2011 (Annexure 3 to the memo of this LPA). It has further been submitted by counsel for the appellant that after the advertisement was issued in the year 2007, and the whole selection process including viva-voice test and result thereof, is declared in the year 2011, the State of Jharkhand adopted the recommendation of the AICTE dated 05.03.2010 on 31st March, 2012. The rules have now been changed so far as basic qualification for the post of Associate Professor is concerned. It is further submitted by counsel for the appellant (original petitioner) that the post of Lecturer is now converted into the post of Assistant Professor. Similarly, the post of Assistant Professor is now converted into Associate Professor and the post of Professor has been maintained as it is on and from March, 2012 onwards. (ii) Nonetheless, facts remain that this appellant who applied for the post of Assistant Professor and whose selection process has also been completed for the very same post, now he should be given the post of Associate Professor. As per earlier rules, Ph.d Degree was to be obtained within a period of seven years from the date of appointment. This appellant (original petitioner) was appointed in March, 2013 (Annexure 5) and obtained Ph.D degree on 07.05.2014. As per new rules, after advertisement and after selection process is completed, this Ph.D degree should be with the candidate as on the date of application. This new rule cannot be applied to the old advertisement and completed selection process. (iii) Counsel for the appellant (original petitioner) has relied upon judgments reported in:- (a) (1997) 6 SCC 623 (Chairman, Railway Board and Ors. v. C.R.Rangadhamaiah & Ors.) (b) (2010) 13 SCC 467 (State of Bihar & Ors. v. Mithilesh Kumar) (c) (2014) 8 SCC 644 (Public Service Commission, Uttaranchal v. Jagdish Chandra Singh Bora & Anr.) Learned counsel for the appellant also relied upon the decisions rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. No. 151 of 2014 dated 16.06.2005 against which S.L.P. preferred by the State, has been dismissed by the order dated 04.03.2016. (iv) On the basis of the aforesaid decisions, it is submitted by the counsel for the appellant that the State has all power to frame the new rules, but, in the service jurisprudence, the new rules for qualification cannot be applied to the old advertisement and the completed selection process. This aspect of the matter has not been properly appreciated by the learned single Judge in W.P.(S) No. 2192 of 2013 dated 26th August, 2015 and hence, the prayers, as prayed for in the writ petition may kindly be granted by the suitable modification in the judgment dated 26th August, 2015 delivered by the learned single Judge.
(3.) Arguments canvassed by counsel for the State: (i) Counsel appearing for the respondent-State submitted that the public advertisement was issued on 22nd June, 2007 for the post of Assistant Professor being advertisement no. 8 of 2007 in pursuance to which the selection process was started and the J.P.S.C. recommended the names of several candidates for the aforesaid posts, including this appellant (original petitioner) by recommendation letter dated 07.09.2011 (Annexure 3). (ii) Meanwhile i.e. after the recommendation made and before the appointment letter is given, Jharkhand State has adopted the recommendation of the AICTE dated 05.03.2010 on 31st March, 2012, and therefore, the appointment letter which was given in the year 2013, State has granted appointment to this appellant as Assistant Professor (Ex-Lecturer). This is mainly for the reason that the qualification for the post of Associate Professor has now been changed, after advertisement and after selection process is over. Now, the requirement for the post of Associate Professor is that candidate should have Ph.D degree as on date of application. This appellant (original petitioner) had no Ph.D degree as on date on which he had applied and, hence, no error has been committed by the State in granting appointment letter in the year 2013 as Assistant Professor (Ex-Lecturer). (iii) Nonetheless, the learned single Judge has relegated the matter of this appellant to the State to decide his claim within a period of six weeks with a direction that the same will be decided in accordance with law and in view of the decisions which are applicable to the facts of the present case. Hence, this court may not allow this letters patent appeal.;