Andhra Pradesh - Anantapur   

Faculty recruitment notification set aside

ANANTAPUR: The administration of Sri Krishnadevaraya University (SKU) here has been at the receiving end once again for committing irregularities in the administrative matters.

In a recent judgment, the High Court has squarely blamed the university authorities for subverting the norms in vogue in the selection process of appointment of assistant professors.

The court has faulted the university authorities, particularly, for non-compliance of the procedures in vogue for following the roster points as per the reservation policy of the State for academic positions in the universities. The court observed in its verdict that “the mischief has started from the day when the university sought permission from the Director of Social Welfare” for approval of the roster points.

Giving the verdict in writ petitions (Nos. 7471, 10180, 11091 and 11158 of 2007) filed by a few aspirants for the posts, Justice C.V. Ramulu stated that the Higher Education Department had permitted the university to fill 15 assistant professor posts through latter dated January 5, 2005, not mentioning the departments in which the vacant posts had to be filled.

Another 14 assistant professor posts were sanctioned to the university through GO No. 58, dated May 18, 2006, by specifying the departments where the vacancies had to be filled. As the posts sanctioned in 2005 were not filled due to retirement of V-C and objections over roster points, they were clubbed with the posts sanctioned in 2006 and the then Registrar had written to the Director of Social Welfare on December 27, 2006 for approval of roster points for filling 29 posts.

The Director of B.C. Welfare wrote to the university on December 2, 2006 that the two posts reserved for BCs, which were not filled due to non-availability of candidates on an earlier occasion, be carried forward and filled in later exercises. Accordingly, the university issued a notification on February 26, 2007 for filling the 29 posts.

On the contentions raised by the petitioners on violation of the norms the court went through the arguments and rules in vogue and held that the university had altered the posts sanctioned in the second sanction and included them in the list of first sanction. “The university has no answer except saying that they are at liberty to change the subjects and arrange the rosters as they like,” the judge observed. But, no reasons were furnished in support of their arbitrary powers.

The university had jumbled the subjects only for the purpose of choosing them against particular roster points. There was no necessity for the university to jumble the subjects to subjects from one list to another and “it appears that the roster points were arranged by jumbling the subjects to suit their own plans,” the Judge observed in the verdict.

If allowed, the liberty claimed by the university would probably allow it to play mischief in each and every recruitment, the Judge felt, while setting aside the notification.

When contacted, Registrar Y. Krishna Reddy said they would table the court judgment in the Executive Council (EC) meeting scheduled to be held in a few days and would take an appropriate decision.

He, however, refused to comment on the judgment stating that they had not received the full text of the verdict.

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Stories in this Section

Collector asks teachers to improve SSC results
Faculty recruitment notification set aside

Copyright © 2008, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu