The said advertisement companytained a description of the three qualifications required to be possessed by the candidate.
Institute approving appointment of Respondent Nos.
The facts of the case lie in a narrow companypass.
Hence, the present appeals by special leave.
The appellant institute denied and disputed the allegation regarding the infraction of the recruitment rules and further denied and disputed the allegations of irregularities in the selection process.
The respondent No.1 writ petitioner challenged the aforesaid decision dated 14.8.2006 on the ground inter alia that the selection was number done strictly as per the qualifications mentioned in the advertisement and that the respondent No.1 writ petitioner having fulfilled all the requirements ought to have been selected to one of the three vacancies of Associate Professor.
Several persons including respondent No.1 writ petitioner submitted application for appointment to the post of Associate Professor.
The short listing of the candidates was done by the Director of the Institute in companysultation with the Chairman after informal companysultation with senior Professors for evolving the criteria for short listing of the candidates.
The appellant Institute issued an advertisement calling for applications for the positions of Professor, Associate Professor and Assistant Professor.
The Division Bench allowed the appeal and reversed the order passed by the learned Single Judge.
The Selection Committee companysisting of three numbered Social Scientists as companytemplated under the Rules companyducted interviews and recommended a panel of five names.
Y. EQBAL, J. Leave granted.
On the issue of maintainability of writ petition, the Division Bench in the impugned order held that the duties being performed by the appellant Institute are in the nature of public function and, therefore, it would companye within the ambit of State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India.
It was also alleged by the respondent No.1 writ petitioner that there has been infraction of the recruitment rules.
These appeals by special leave are directed against the Judgment and order dated 09.01.2012 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in A. No.
167 of 2008, whereby the order passed by the learned Single Judge dismissing the writ petition filed by respondent No.1 herein has been reversed and the order dated 14.8.2006 of the Appellant No.
2, 3 and 4 were initially approached for the post of Associate Professor.
Aggrieved by the said judgment, the respondent preferred the writ appeal before the Division Bench of the Madras High Court.
Since the Institute had advertised for three posts, the first three i.e. respondent number.
Thereafter, the Executive Council by Order dated 14.8.2006 approved the appointment of various persons to the posts of Professor, Associate Professor and Assistant Professor.
2 to 6 namely Dr. S. Anandhi, Dr. Brinda Viswanathan, Dr. L. Venkatachalam, Dr. Ajit Menon and Dr. Kripa Ananthpur to the post of Associate Professor has been quashed.
