- Apprentice Lawyer
- Legal Jobs
The Delhi High Court today disposed of as premature a petition challenging the interview which was conducted by the Selection Committee constituted for the appointment of Vice-Chancellor to National Law University, Delhi. (Dr Prasannanshu vs Selection Committee for VC NLUD)
A single Judge Bench of Justice Jyoti Singh refused to interfere with the interview process on the ground that the Petitioner's representtaion on the same issue was pending consideration before the Chancellor of National Law University, Delhi (NLUD).
The Petitioner, Dr Prasannanshu had joined NLUD in 2009 as an Associate Professor and was promoted as a Professor in July 2015.
Certain that he fulfilled all conditions of eligibility, the Petitioner applied to the Selection Committee for the post of Vice-Chancellor, NLUD, in the prescribed format and within the deadline.
Subsequently, the Selection Committee called candidates for interview in the month of February 2020.
It was the Petitioner’s grievance that the Selection Committee chose to not invite the Petitioner for an interaction and did not even provide any reason for the same.
The Petitioner asserted that he had a glorious record and academic profile and fulfilled all the requirements enshrined in the advertisement calling for application for the post of the Vice-Chancellor.
The Petitioner thus contended that he was not treated at par with other candidates, which was in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution.
It was submitted that the procedure adopted by the Selection Committee was grossly illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable and not germane to the principle of intelligible differentia.
The Petitioner added that although he had made a representation to the Chancellor, NLUD with regards his grievances, he was constrained to move the High Court after he learnt that the Selection Committee was in the process of declaring the result of the interview.
In view of the submissions made by the parties, the Court, however, opined that the petition was premature.
The Court thus asked the Registrar, NLUD to place the representation before the Chancellor, NLUD for his consideration and said that its outcome shall be communicated to the Petitioner within three days from the decision.
In case the Petitioner is aggrieved by the decision, he is at liberty to take recourse to the remedies available to him in accordance with law, it was clarified.
The petition was accordingly disposed of.
Advocate Karan Suneja appeared for the Petitioner.
Advocates SD Sharma and Sanjay Vashishth appeared for NLUD.
Read the Order: