Madhya Pradesh High Court: In a petition challenged the appointment of two individuals, respondent 6 and respondent 7, who were appointed as Readers in the departments of Mass Communication and Public Relations & Advertising, respectively, a single-judge bench comprising of Vivek Agarwal, J., held that the impugned appointments were invalid due to failure to meet minimum qualifications and the improper composition of the selection committee and ordered a fresh recruitment process to rectify the deficiencies.
In the instant matter, the respondent, Makhan Lal Chaturvedi Rashtriya Patrakarita Avam Sanchar Vishwavidyalaya, Bhopal issued an advertisement dated 11-04-2008 for the appointment of faculties in various departments including Journalism, Audio Visual, Public Relations & Advertising, Mass Communication, and Computer Science and Applications. The petitioner contested the appointments in the Public Relations & Advertising and Mass Communication departments. The respondent 6, was appointed as a Reader in the Mass Communication department and respondent 7 was appointed as a Reader in the Public Relations & Advertising department. The petitioner raised two issues; first, respondent 6 did not meet the minimum qualification requirement of 10 years of experience after obtaining the prescribed qualifications and second, the selection committee did not include the Heads of the concerned departments, which was mandated by Section 33(2)(d) of the M.P. Makhanlal Chaturvedi Rashtriya Patrakarita Avam Sanchar Vishwavidyalaya Act, 1990.
The Court found that respondent 6 did not fulfill the ten years of post-qualification experience requirement, as he did not provide evidence of employment during a certain period, thus failing to meet the required experience criteria. The Court noted that the non-inclusion of the Heads of the Mass Communication and Public Relations & Advertising departments in the selection committee violated the statutory mandate of Section 33(2)(d). The Court rejected the argument that one of the heads had retired, as evidence suggested she was available at the time of selection. The Court also dismissed the argument that a reader could not be part of the selection committee, as the statutory provision allowed for heads of departments to be included, regardless of their specific title within the department.
“…when Professors/Head of the Department were available in the respondent-university, then their non-inclusion shows that university under the then Vice Chancellor and the Registrar were playing a partition game of pick and choose by choosing their persons to be part of the selection committee by ignoring the mandate of Madhya Pradesh Makhanlal Chaturvedi Rashtriya Patrakarita Avam Sanchar Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1990.”
The Court deemed the appointments of respondents 6 and 7, vitiated and quashed the same. The Court directed the respondents to issue a fresh advertisement and conduct a new interview for the appointment of a Reader in the Department of Journalism and Mass Communication.
[Ashutosh Mishra v. Makhan Lal Chaturvedi Rashtriya Patrakarita Vishwidyalaya, 2024 SCC OnLine MP 2620, order dated 25-04-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
Shri Nityanand Mishra, Counsel for the Petitioner
Shri R.G. Mahajan, Counsel for the Respondent No. 1, 4 and 5
Shri Akash Choudhury, Counsel for the Respondent No. 6 and 7
