High Court Quashes Professor Appointment over Invalid Selection process
Photo used for indicative purpose only. Source internet
Shimla, Sept 2,
In a ruling that underscores the sanctity of public employment advertisements, the Himachal Pradesh High Court has nullified the appointment of an Assistant Professor at Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Krishi Vishvavidyalaya. The court found that the selection committee illegally altered the essential qualifications after the process had begun.
Justice Sandeep Sharma, in a decisive oral judgment, stated, “Since common questions of facts and law are involved in both the cases, this Court heard them together and now same are being decided vide common judgment.” The core question before the court was “whether Selection Committee constituted for the selection to the post of Assistant Professor, of its own could have called upon certain candidates to provide equivalence certificate with regard to their qualification, especially when in advertisement notice, no provision of ‘equivalent qualification’ was provided.”
The dispute arose from a 2019 advertisement for the post of Assistant Professor in Agricultural Biotechnology, which explicitly required a “M.Sc./ M. Tech… in the concerned discipline” – specifically, Agricultural Biotechnology. The court noted that the selection committee, upon finding that many applicants held a general M.Sc. in Biotechnology, took it upon itself to introduce a new requirement. These candidates were called for an interview “provisionally subject to production of certificate of equivalence.”
The petitioners argued, and the court concurred, that this mid-process change was unlawful. Justice Sharma emphasized, “Had respondent-University used word ‘equivalent’ with prescribed qualification… screening committee could have called upon respondents… to produce equivalence certificate.” However, since the advertisement was specific, the committee’s actions amounted to an unauthorized alteration of the eligibility criteria.
The judgment firmly established that the power to decide equivalence lies with a university’s academic bodies, not its selection committee. The court found that “no procedure was envisaged under the University Statutes for determination or issuance of equivalence certificate” by the registrar who issued it, rendering the certificates invalid.
In its conclusion, the court ruled, “Appointment of respondent No.2 to the post of Assistant Professor… is quashed and set-aside.” Furthermore, the court directed the university to “offer him appointment against the post in question” to the petitioner who was next in line on the merit list among eligible candidates. The ruling reinforces that the terms of an advertisement are sacrosanct and cannot be modified to benefit select candidates after the recruitment process is underway.
About the Author
The HimachalScape Bureau comprises seasoned journalists from Himachal Pradesh with over 25 years of experience in leading media conglomerates such as The Times of India and United News of India. Known for their in-depth regional insights, the team brings credible, research-driven, and balanced reportage on Himachal’s socio-political and developmental landscape.
