Guru Nanak College of Education vs The Panjab University and Others

Rakesh Kumar Jain, J.—The petitioner-college has challenged the validity of order dated 06.07.2013 (Annexure P-8) by which seats allotted to it for the B.Ed. course have been reduced from 200 to 100. Counsel for the petitioner, inter alia, submits that not only the impugned order has been passed behind the back of the petitioner, i.e. without following the principle of audi alteram partem, but also the objection raised by the respondents are also ill-founded because the petitioner has already appointed the Principal, who could be a retired Professor, on contract basis in terms of note attached to Appendix-IV and have also appointed 2 more regular Assistant Professors, namely,

Ms. Lakhwinder Kaur and Ms. Gurpreet Kaur, in the meeting held on 27.02.2013.

Notice of motion.

Mr. Amar Vivek, counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent no. 1-University, submits that insofar as the discrepancies recorded by the Inspection Committee on 11.03.2013, the University has no objection regarding item nos. 3, 4 and 5, but insofar as item nos. 1 and 2 are concerned, the discrepancies have been noted by the Inspection Committee on 02.03.2013.

I have seen the inspection report dated 02.03.2013 in which only recommendation made by the committee is with regard to appointment of regular Principal through properly constituted selection committee.

Counsel for respondent no. 1-University is tentatively satisfied with regard to the appointment of Principal in view of the note attached with Appendix-IV but has raised serious objection with regard to the appointment of 2 more regular Assistant Professors, as observed by the Inspection Committee in para 7 of the report.

Counsel for the petitioner has pointed out from the impugned order that to remove the deficiencies of the required number of teachers, the College is given time up to 30.07.2013 and, thereafter, the Inspection Committee will re-visit the College to verify the compliance in totality including the appointment of the required teachers & payment of salary to them as per NCTE/UGC/PU/Punjab Govt. norms. If still the deficiencies are reported, no admission in the course(s) shall be allowed for the session 2014-15. He submits that before the cut off date, i.e. 30.07.2013, could approach, the intake of the admission for B.Ed. course has been arbitrarily reduced from 200 to 100.

Faced with this argument, counsel for respondent no. 1-University submits that if the petitioner files an undertaking in this Court that they would appoint the required 2 more regular Assistant Professors on or before 30.07.2013, the University has no objection with regard to the intake of required number of admissions, which has been reduced from 200 to 100.

Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is ready and willing to give the undertaking by way of an affidavit by tomorrow and respondent no. 1-University shall give the selection panel within 3 days thereafter for the purpose of selection of 2 regular Assistant Professors, as required.

In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, the present petition is disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file the required undertaking, as stated above, by tomorrow and copy thereof be supplied to respondent no. 1-University, who shall constitute a selection panel for appointment of 2 more regular Assistant Professors, within a period of 3 days thereafter. The petitioner shall appoint 2 more regular Assistant Professors, as required, on or before the cut off date, i.e. 30.07.2013. In the meantime, respondent no. 1-University shall permit the petitioner-college to give admissions on 200 seats in the B.Ed. course, subject to the condition that if the undertaking is not given and the appointment of 2 regular Assistant Professors is not made on or before the date stipulated here-in-above, subject to the constitution of the selection committee, then the present writ petition shall be deemed to be dismissed.

At this stage, before the order could be signed, Mr. Rajiv Atma Ram, Senior Advocate, appeared in Court in the post lunch session and filed undertaking of Sudhir Sharma, Chairman of the Institution, in the form of affidavit. A copy of this order be supplied to the counsel for the parties under signatures of the Special Secretary attached to this Bench.