GIRISH CHANDRA VARMA JABALPUR Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION SE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner by this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeks to issue a writ of certiorari to quash the order dated 17-11-1972, (Annexure-K) passed by respondent No. 1, whereby respondents nos. 3 to 5 were promoted to the posts of Reader in the Engineering Colleges. The petitioner further seeks to issue a writ of mandamus commanding the respondent No. 2 to review and revise the select list for the promotion to the posts of Reader.

(2.) THE petitioner is a Lecturer in Mathematics in Government Engineering College, Jabalpur. He was appointed on 29th August 1957 and his academic qualification was M. Sc. in Mathematics. Pursuant to the provisions of the M. P. Educational Service (Technical Branch) Recruitment Rules, 1957, published in M. P. Rajpatra, part IV (ga) dated 24-5-1968 (hereinafter referred to as Recruitment Rules), respondent No. 2, the Departmental Promotion Committee held its meeting on 20-8-1971 and after considering the claims of respective candidates, prepared a list which included the names of respondents Nos. 3 to 5. The name of the petitioner was not considered by the said respondent No. 2, on the ground that he did not possess Ph. D. Degree. The select list prepared by respondent No. 2 was forwarded to the State Government and the State Government in turn forwarded it to the Public Service commission. Meanwhile, the petitioner was declared to be successful for ph. D. in Mathematics and he intimated this fact to the State Government on 21-12-1971. The petitioner also made certain representations to the State government to include his name in the select list, but no attention was paid to it and the impugned order (Annexure-K) was issued giving promotion to respondents Nos. 3 to 5 to the exclusion of the petitioner, who was senior to them.

(3.) IT is not disputed that the petitioner was senior to respondents Nos, 3 to 5. In the seniority list (Annexure-G) the name of the petitioner appears, at Serial No. 2, while the names of respondents 3 to 5 appear at Serial nos. 3, 7 and 15, respectively. It is also not disputed that the Departmental promotion Committee, who met on 20-8-1971, did not select the petitioner simply because he had not obtained the Ph. D. Degree by that time. But for this academic qualification, there was no other ground on which the petitioner could be superseded by respondents Nos. 3, 4 and 5. Therefore, the short point. for consideration in this case is whether the Degree of Ph. D. in mathematics was a requisite qualification for selecting the names for promotion to the higher post from the employees working in the lower posts.