Delhi High Court
Tahir Hussain vs Jawaharlal Nehru University & Ors on 31 January, 2018
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Date of Order: January 31, 2018
+ W.P.(C) 877/2018 & CM 3719/2018
TAHIR HUSSAIN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Prithu Garg, Mr. Abhay Pratap
Singh and Mr. Siddharth Mehta, Advocates
versus
JAWAHARLAL NEHRU UNIVERSITY & ORS .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Monika Arora, CGSC and Mr.
Kushal Kumar, Advocate for respondent-JNU
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER
(ORAL)
1. Impugned Notification of 6th October, 2017 (Annexure P-1)
amends the Recruitment Rules of Non-Teaching Posts for Grade 'B' and
Grade 'C' of Ministerial and Secretarial Cadre and thereby dispenses with
the interview for the said posts. Petitioner had applied for the post of
Junior Assistant-cum-Typist way back on 13th November, 2013 and had
undertaken Skill Test and Written Test on 25th May, 2016 and as per the
Result (Annexure P-10) of Written Test held on 25th May, 2016,
petitioner has qualified and so, petitioner was waiting for the interview
call. Vide another Notification of even date, which is also impugned in
this petition, the Advertisements of the years 2013, 2014 and 2015 for
Grade 'B' and Grade 'C' posts have been cancelled while clarifying that
these posts would be re-advertized.
2. Learned counsel for petitioner assails impugned Notifications
(Annexure P-1) on the ground that petitioner has become overage by now
and that there is no justification for respondent-University to dispense
with the interview and that impugned Notifications seriously prejudice
the case of petitioner and many other similarly placed persons. Thus, it is
submitted that impugned Notifications deserve to be quashed with
direction to respondent-University to hold the interviews in pursuance of
Result (Annexure P-10) of the Written Test held on 25th May, 2016.
Learned counsel for petitioner maintains that any amendment to the Rules
relating to Recruitment to Non-Teaching posts require ratification by the
Visitor of respondent-University, who is the President of India, and since
the amendment to Recruitment Rules does not have the assent of the
Visitor of respondent-University, therefore, the interview cannot be
dispensed with and respondent-University is required to declare the final
result for the Examination in question after holding Interviews. To submit
so, attention of this Court is drawn to Sections 8 and 16 of The
Jawaharlal Nehru University Act, 1966.
3. Since petitioner has not made any Representation to respondent-
University, therefore, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this petition
with permission to petitioner to make a concise Representation to
respondent-University within a week from today and upon receiving such
a Representation, the concerned Authority of respondent-University is
required to effectively deal with the Representation and to indicate as to
whether any amendment in the Recruitment Rules can be made without
the assent of the Visitor of respondent-University and what is the
rationale/logic to dispense with the interview when the selection process
has already begun.
4. It has to be also kept in mind while deciding petitioner's
Representation as to what would happen to the candidates, who have
become overage by now. Let a speaking order be passed on petitioner's
Representation within a period of two weeks of receiving it and its fate be
conveyed to petitioner within a week thereafter, so that petitioner may
avail of the remedies as available in law, if need be. Till the fate of
Representation is conveyed to petitioner, impugned Notifications of 6 th
October, 2017 (Annexure P-1) be not given effect to.
5. With the aforesaid directions, this petition and the application are
disposed of.
Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the parties.
(SUNIL GAUR)
JUDGE
JANUARY 31, 2018
s
