Manoj Kumar T.T.K. vs The Onvenor of The Selection Committee and The Calicut University

P.R. Ramachandra Menon, J.—The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:

i) To issue a Writ of Mandamus forbearing the University of Calicut from finalizing appointments to various posts pursuant to Exhibit P1 until it is ensured that the principles of reservation and rotation compulsorily required to be followed are fully complied with.

ii) to declare that the failure of the University of Calicut to follow the principles of communal rotation and reservation mandatorily required is violative of Articles 14, 15, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India.

iii) To issue a writ of Mandamus forbearing the University of Calicut from making any appointments pursuant to Exhibit P1 by passing an interim order to that effect.

iv) to issue such other writs, orders or directions as this Hon''ble court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

The grievance projected in the writ Petition, which is styled as a PIL is that the respondent University is not following the communal rotation, which is a mandatory requirement, in respect of various posts, notified as per Ext. P1. It is stated that the petitioner belongs to ''Thiyya'' community and he is a research scholar attached to the University of Calicut. It is however conceded that the petitioner has not passed the ''NET'' and not qualified to apply for any of the posts notified vide Ext.P1 notification. The case of the petitioner is that, on completion of his ''Ph.D'' and on passing ''NET'' he is also desirous of competing in the selection to different posts in the University. It is the apprehension of the petitioner that, if the rule of rotation is not properly followed by the University now, he is likely to be affected in the long run, which made the petitioner to approach this Court by filing the present Writ Petition.

Going by the admitted facts and figures, this Court finds that the petitioner is trying to project an anticipatory cause of action, which is not liable to be entertained by this Court. Being aware of the fact that the petitioner is not qualified for the post notified vide Ext.P1 and that the cause of action is still to come, the petitioner has chosen to mould his grievance as a ''PIL'', that too, in the realm of service jurisprudence, where no interference is warranted in view of settled position of law.

We find no merits in the case and it is dismissed accordingly.