On 1 6 91 an advertisement was issued for the post, inter alia, of a Professor in the Post Graduate Department of Law, University of Sambalpur.
Under the changed guidelines, for the post of a Professor, 10 years experience of teaching, number prescribed was, in Post Graduate Teaching and or Research at the University National Level Institutions including experience or guiding research at doctoral level.
1 challenged the selection and appointment of the appellant on the ground that the guidelines prescribed by the University Grants Commission were changed with effect from 19 9 91.
It was only thereafter, on 19 9 91 that the new qualification regarding ten years teaching experience at the post graduate level came into effect.
On 25 7 91 the Syndicate prepared an assessment chart of the candidates who had submitted their applications pursuant to the advertisement.
In the advertisement the essential qualifications for the post of Professor were An eminent scholar, actively engaged in research with published work of high quality.
On 11 5 92 interviews were field for the post by the specially companystituted Selection Committee.
This was in accordance with the then existing guidelines of the University Grants Commission prescribing minimum qualifications for appointment to the post of Professor.
The last date of submitting applications was 15 7 91.
The companytention of the original respondent that the appellant did number possess 10 years experience of teaching at the Post Graduate level was accepted by the High Court which set aside the appointment.
The appellant has, however, companytinued in the post pursuant to the directions originally given by the High Court and thereafter on account of the interim order of this Court.
OR An outstanding scholar with established reputation who has made significant companytribution to knowledge.
The essential qualification prescribed in the advertisement included 10 years experience of teaching and or research.
About 10 years experience of teaching and or research.
The Committee selected the present appellant for appointment to the post of Professor in the Post Graduate.
He was one of the candidate for the post and had submitted that since he was at No.
Experience of guiding research at doctoral level.
Therefore, the advertisement also prescribed the same qualification.
2 in the select list, he should have been selected in place of the appellant.
Even on the date when the Syndicate prepared an assessment chart, the position was the same.
The original 1st respondent is number dead.
Department of Law, University of Sambalpur.
The appellant possessed that qualification.
The original respondent No.
