Dr. K.V. Lazar vs The University Of Calicut
2022 Latest Caselaw 9364 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
 WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 19TH SRAVANA, 1944
                      WP(C) NO. 22072 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

             DR. K.V. LAZAR
             AGED 69 YEARS
             TP6/785, CHENAKKAL, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P O-673635,
             MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, EMAIL - [email protected]
             BY ADVS.
             Dr.K.M.GEORGE
             CHITHRA P.GEORGE


RESPONDENTS:

     1       THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT
             REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR, UNIVERSITY OF
             CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O., MALAPPURAM
             DISTRICT, PIN- 673 635.
     2       THE REGISTRAR,
             UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT, CALICUT UNIVERSITY P.O.,
             MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 673 635.
             SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN - SC
      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   10.08.2022,   THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 22072 OF 2022          2

                            JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court with a singular plea

that Ext.P4 order of the University of Calicut be directed to be

implemented within a time frame to be fixed by this Court. He says

that he has reliable information that Ext.P4 is not being implemented

by the University solely on account of an audit objection raised much

subsequent to it; and argues that this is illegal and unlawful because

the University is governed by its own Statutes and that action taken

thereunder, as also under its applicable Regulations, cannot be

overruled or superseded by an audit objection. The petitioner,

therefore, prays that the reliefs sought for in this writ petition be

granted to him without any further delay.

2. I have heard Dr.K.M.George - learned counsel for the

petitioner and Sri.P.C.Sasidharan - learned Standing Counsel for the

Calicut University,.

3. Sri.P.C.Sasidharan - learned Standing Counsel for the

University, affirmed that Ext.P4 had been issued by the University as

early as on 05.10.2018; but explained that, subsequently, when audit

objections were raised, they were rendered incapacitated from

implementing the same. He argued that since the petitioner has not

produced a copy of the audit objections, he cannot now seek an

omnibus prayer that Ext.P4 be implemented; and thus prayed that

this writ petition be dismissed.

4. Even when I hear Sri.P.C.Sasidharan on the afore lines, as

rightly argued by Dr.K.M.George, normally, decisions taken by the

University are as per their Statutes, Regulations and the applicable

Rules governing the field. Therefore, when valid decisions are taken

by them, particularly in favour of teachers like the petitioner, they

are necessary to be implemented; and I fail to understand how they

can refuse to do so merely on the basis of an audit objection, which

usually cannot overrule such decisions taken validly under the

applicable statutory schemes.

5. However, since the petitioner has not produced the copy of

the audit objections and says that he has not been even served with

the same until today, I am certain that the entire matter will require

to be considered by the competent Authority of the University

without any further delay.

Resultantly, I allow this writ petition and direct the competent

Authority of the University to hear the petitioner within a period of

two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and

then take a decision as to the implementation of Ext.P4.

If, for any reason, the University is to find that Ext.P4 cannot be

implemented, then they shall notify the petitioner and inform him,

through an appropriate proceedings, as to why it cannot be done, so

as to enable him to invoke further remedies in law, as he may be

advised.

The resultant order, in either of the two afore scenario, shall be

issued not later than two weeks from the date on which the hearing

of the petitioner is completed.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/10.8

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 22072/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF "UGC (MINIMUM QUALIFICATION FOR APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS AND OTHER ACADEMIC STAFF IN UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES AND MEASURES FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF STANDARDS IN HIGHER EDUCATION) REGULATIONS, 2010 (NO. F. 3-1/2009 (PS)" DATED 30/06/2010.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF THE CALICUT UNIVERSITY NOTIFICATION NO.3696/GA-I-F1/2013/CU DATED 26/02/2014. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF U.O. NO. 84726/GA-II-F-SO/ 2014/ADMN DATED 16/6/2018 ON CAS VERIFICATION COMMITTEE.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE UNIVERSITY ORDER U.O.

NO. 11716/2018 ADMN DATED 05/10/2018. Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S REQUEST DATED 01/11/2018.

Exhibit P5(A) TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S REQUEST (OPTION FORM) DATED 18/12/2018.

Exhibit P5(B) TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 15/03/2022.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE SYNDICATE RESOLUTION 2012.777.

Exhibit P1 True copy of "relevant pages i.e. "Page Nos.7848, 7849, 7850, 7851, 7852, 7882, 7883, 7884, 7885, 7886, 7887 and 7888" of "UGC (Minimum Qualification for Appointment of Teachers and othr Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Measures for the Maintenance of Standards In Higher Education) Regulations, 2010 (No.F.3-1/2009 (PS)" dated 30.6.2010".