AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
In pursuance of advertisement for teaching post issued in December, 2013 by respondent-University, petitioner had applied for the post of
Associate Professor in Electronics and Communication Engineering.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the results in relation to the Advertisement of December, 2013 were declared in August, 2014.
Aggrieved by her non-selection, petitioner had also challenged the selection of fifth and sixth respondent in W.P. (C) 2657/2014 which stood disposed
of vide order of 30th November, 2016 (Annexure P-4), while granting liberty to petitioner to file a fresh writ petition with adequate pleadings. In this
petition, the constitution of Screening Committee as well as Selection Committee is under challenge on factual aspects.
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that despite resort to RTI, the requisite information could not be obtained by petitioner.
Upon hearing, I find that there is no clarity on facts. In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate to permit petitioner to file
a concise Representation to question her non-selection and the selection of respondent no. 5 and 6. If such Representation is received by respondent-
University within two weeks, then it be effectively considered by giving a speaking response within six weeks and the fate of the Representation be
made known to petitioner within a week thereafter.
With aforesaid direction, this petition and the applications are accordingly disposed of.
Copy of this order be given dasti to learned counsel for the parties.