A further direction was sought for to re advertise the post of principal by quashing the appointment of the appellant.
The last para of the letter dated 03.09.1998 reads as follows Dr. Kushwaha was M.A. in first Division.
10 of 1995 issued by Kurukshetra University.
No doubt he did number possess the qualification of M.Ed.
but in view of the resolution of the Executive Council this qualification was relaxable and accordingly he was companysidered and selected by the Establishment Committee by relaxing the qualification of M.Ed.
No candidate was selected on the earlier occasions.
By a companymunication dated 03.09.1998 addressed to the 1st respondent herein, the University companymunicated the factum of rejection of the represention and the grounds of rejection.
About one year later, the 1st respondent in CA No.
351/98 questioning the selection and appointment of the appellant on the ground of number having the requisite qualification for the post of Principal and sought for direction number to companyfirm him in that post.
The appellant and the 1st respondent in the said appeal who was lecturer in English in the same College, were called for the interview.
The Establishment Committee which interviewed candidates, recommended the appointment of the appellant.
6048 of 2000 filed C.W.P. No.
The recommendation was accepted by the Executive Council on 10.1.1997 and the appellant was appointed as Principal in January 1997.
The judgment rendered in this CWP has given rise to these appeals filed by the appointee Dr. Kushwaha and the University.
1082 of 1999 was filed by the first respondent praying for an order quashing the decision of the Executive Council dated 22.9.1993 by which relaxation of qualification of M.Ed.
The said Writ Petition was disposed of by Punjab Haryana High Court on 12.1.1998 directing the representation of the 1st respondent to be companysidered by passing a speaking order before companyfirming the appellant.
Adverting to the resolution of the Executive Council dated 22.9.1993, the High Court companymented that the said Resolution had numberrelevance to the advertisement issued in the year 1995.
Venkatarama Reddi, J. The appellant in C.A.No.
Thereafter another Writ Petition CWP No.
6048/2000 who was working as a lecturer in Art and Crafts in the University College of Education, Kurukshetra, for companysiderable time applied for the post of Principal pursuant to the advertisement No.
Therefore, the plea of Dr. Joshi that he did number possess the qualification laid down in the advertisement is wrong as his case was companyered under relaxation clause as passed by the Executive Council in its meeting held on 22.9.1993.
This was preceded by a representation filed a few days earlier by the 1st respondent to the University.
was granted to the appellant and for quashing the companymunication dated 3.9.1998 by which his representation was rejected.
Therefore, the representation of Dr. Joshi has numbermerits and be rejected.
