Reconstitution Of Selection Committee During The Middle Of Interview Proceedings Highly Illegal: Kerala HC Orders Kannur University To Conduct Fresh Selection Of Assistant Professor
The Petitions before the Kerala High Court were filed by the applicants who had applied to the post of Assistant Professor (Geography) in the first respondent-Kannur University.
The Kerala High Court directed Kannur University to conduct the selection process afresh to the post of Assistant Professor and held that the reconstitution of the Selection Committee in the middle of the interview proceedings would cause injustice to the candidates.
The Petitions before the High Court were filed by the applicants who had applied to the post of Assistant Professor (Geography) in the first respondent-Kannur University. They sought a declaration that the constitution of the Selection Committee, substitution of the Chairman of the Selection Committee and all further actions thereafter, are opposed to law and the process of selection is bad in law.
The Single Bench of Justice N. Nagaresh held, “If the Vice Chancellor had any personal or other difficulty in presiding over the Selection Committee proceedings on 30.11.2023, it would have been appropriate to cancel the interview proceedings already held in part and subject all the candidates to appear in a fresh interview proceedings by the reconstituted Committee.”
Senior Advocate George Poonthottam represented the Petitioners while Standing Counsel I.V. Pramod represented the Respondents.
Factual Background
The first respondent-Kannur University issued a Notification inviting applications to fill up two posts of Assistant Professor (Geography), out of which one post was in the OC Category and the other post was in the SC Category. The Petitioners were called for an interview for appointment as Assistant Professor on a regular basis as well as selection for appointment on a tenure basis. However, before that, the appointment of the Vice Chancellor was vitiated. The Petitioners put up a case saying that the midway reconstitution of the Selection Committee was impermissible. There couldn’t be ad-hoc arrangements and if the Selection Committee couldn’t continue or complete the selection process, then the entire process was required to be done afresh.
In spite of the illegality in the selection proceedings, the rank list prepared by the Selection Committee was placed before the meeting of the syndicate and the score sheet was approved. Consequently, the rank list was published. The petitioner also claimed that the selection was vitiated by bias.
Reasoning
The Bench discarded the submission of the Petitioners that the yardstick and method of recruitment for a regular post and tenure post are always different and a common interview by itself is wrong. The Bench observed that the selection under both the Notifications is to the same post of Assistant Professor, though appointments are made on different conditions of service. The educational qualification prescribed for appointment to the post on a regular basis and tenure basis is the same. The nature of work expected from persons selected under both the category is also more or less the same.
“The Selection Committee being an expert body and the selection being to the posts of Assistant Professor, though on different conditions of service, I do not find any illegality in conducting common interview for selection to the posts”, it said.
It was further noted that the interview proceedings continued on November 30, 2023 when the Chairman substituted himself by appointing a Professor as the Chairman of the Selection Committee. “When Notification is for recruitment to a limited number of posts of Assistant Professor, reconstitution of the Selection Committee in the midway of the interview proceedings would cause injustice to the candidates appearing in the interview. It would also raise concerns of motive behind the reconstitution of the Committee”, the Bench said while also adding, “ The reconstitution of the Selection Committee during the middle of the interview proceedings is highly illegal and arbitrary. Any selection made pursuant thereto cannot stand the scrutiny of law.”
The Court further explained that the mere fact that the third respondent was the Supervisor of the petitioner while the petitioner was studying at the Jawaharlal Nehru University by itself will not vitiate the selection proceedings.
Thus, the Bench set aside the impugned selection proceedings as well as the provisional rank list dated December 19, 2023. “The respondents are directed to conduct selection afresh to the post of Assistant Professor notified under Exts.P1 and P2 Notifications in W.P. (C) No.43934/2023”, it concluded.
Cause Title: DR. K.B Bindu & Ors. v. Kannur University & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:KER:6869)
Appearance:
Petitioners: Advocates Nisha George, Senior Advocate George Poonthottam, Advocate Kavya Varma M. M.
Respondents: Standing Counsel I.V. Pramod, Advocates Arunima.T.S. Senior Advocate N.N.sugunapalan, K.V. Bhadra Kumari
