Dr.J.Soundararajan Vs Registrar

Registrar, University of Madras, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005. ... Respondent/Respondent/Respondent Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 03.03.2020 made in Review Petition No.41 of 2020 in W.P.No.984 of 2020 and consequently, allow W.P.No.984 of 2020. W.A.No.1785 of 2024

¶12

Dr.J.Soundararajan ... Appellant/Petitioner

¶13

-vs-

¶14

Registrar, University of Madras, Chepauk, Chennai - 600 005. … Respondent/Respondent Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the order dated 10.02.2020 in W.P.Nos.984 of 2020 and consequently, allow the Writ Appeal.

¶15

1/4

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

W.A.Nos.620 of 2021 and 1785 of 2024

¶18

For Appellant : Mr.C.Karthick For Mr.K.Rajasekaran

¶19

For Respondent : Mr.P.Dinesh Kumar

¶20

¶21

C O M M O N J U D G M E N T

¶22

(By S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J.,)

¶23

The Recruitment Notification dated 05.01.2020 for the post of Professor in Ancient History and Archaeology, issued by the University of Madras came to be challenged in the writ proceedings. Writ Petition filed by the appellant was dismissed and thereafter, a Review Application No.41 of 2020 was filed, which was also dismissed by this Court. Challenging the same, the present intra Court appeals have been instituted by the appellant.

¶24

Writ Court made the following factual findings in Paragraph

¶25

Nos.13 to 15 of the order dated 10.02.2020:

¶26

“13.The files pertaining to the minutes of the Selection Committee Meeting held on 17.09.2018, was placed before this Court. The Committee consisted of 8 members. They are the Chairman, 3 Subject Experts, Head of Department, Dean and a Professor who is the Scheduled Caste Nominee. The Selection Committee, after evaluating the academic credentials, achievements and performance in the interview of the petitioner, has awarded a total marks of 50. The Committee considered the performance of the petitioner during the period of assessment (08.11.2013 to 08.11.2016) and found that it is not adequate. The Committee found the

¶27

2/4

¶28

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶29

W.A.Nos.620 of 2021 and 1785 of 2024

¶30

performance of the petitioner for the year 2016-2017 to be adequate and therefore, recommended to promote the petitioner as an Associate Professor (Stage 4) with effect from 08.11.2017. The Committee while considering the performance of the petitioner had taken into consideration, the API score of the petitioner for the period from 08.11.2013 to 07.11.2016 and the score awarded by the Committee is extracted hereunder:

¶31

Category I Category II Category III Category II + III 95 45 218 263

¶32

This score was found to be inadequate. Therefore, the petitioner was not found to fulfil the minimum score requirement. The Committee also considered the API score of the petitioner for the fourth year i.e. 2016-2017 and found it to be adequate and therefore, in line with Clause 6.3.12(c) of the UGC Regulations, the promotion to the post of Associate Professor (Stage 4) was granted with effect from 08.11.2017, which is the later date of successful assessment.

¶33

15.The Selection Committee has made an objective assessment and has come to a conclusion and this Court cannot sit over in judgment on the scores assigned to the petitioner and this Court does not find any apparent illegality in the process adopted by the Selection Committee, while considering the petitioner for promotion to the post of Associate Professor (Stage 4) under CAS. Therefore, there is no reason to interfere with the Notification issued by the respondent University to fill up the post of Professor in the Department of Ancient History and Archaeology. The petitioner will be entitled to be considered for promotion to the post of professor only on completion of three years which falls on 08.11.2020.

¶34

The above factual findings were made after verifying the files produced before the Court. Thus, this Court does not find any infirmity nor the appellant made out any ground for further interference.

¶35