'Avoid Ambiguity, Specify Essential Qualification': Allahabad HC Directs AMU To Ensure Clarity In Future Advertisements For Lecturer Posts

The Allahabad High Court has recently directed the Registrar of the Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) to be cautious and precise in its future advertisements for the posts of Lecturer, ensuring that no ambiguity surrounds the eligibility criteria. “…such ambiguity should be removed i.e. words shall be chosen carefully and instead of ambiguous words “concerned/relevant/allied subject”, the University must specifically mention about qualification so that all eligible candidates may participate in advertisement and no one be left prejudiced,” a bench of Justice Saurabh Shyam Shamshery observed in the operative part of its order. The single judge passed this order while dealing with a dispute over whether candidates with an M.Sc. in Industrial Chemistry should be considered eligible for the Lecturer (Chemistry) position at AMU. The issue arose after AMU issued advertisements in 2019 and 2020 for the Lecturer (Chemistry) post, which mentioned that candidates with a Master's degree in a "concerned/relevant/allied subject" would be eligible for the said post. The petitioners (Amma Khatoon, Dr. Mohd. Azfar Shaida, and Dr. Syed Md. Humayun Akhter) moved the HC seeking to participate in a selection process arguing that use of terms like "concerned/relevant/allied subject" in the advertisement was ambiguous as it created confusion over whether candidates with an M.Sc. in Industrial Chemistry (as was the case with the petitioners) would qualify or not. Advocate Zeeshan Khan, appearing for the petitioners, argued that their clients' M.Sc. in Industrial Chemistry qualified as an “allied subject” and they would be eligible for the post advertised by the University. Interestingly, he pointed out though AMU published a corrigendum in 2019, reinforcing that M.Sc. in Industrial Chemistry could not be considered equal to M.Sc. in Chemistry, a 2021 meeting of the AMU determined that M.Sc. in Industrial Chemistry could be an "allied subject" for posts in the University Polytechnic, but this was conditional on no candidates from the main subject (Chemistry) being available. In view of the above apparently contradictory actions of the University, he contended that such move caused more prejudice to petitioners, and both decisions were not only self-contrary but also arbitrary. Further, Advocate Ali Bin Saif, advocate for the petitioners, also argued that the AMU had failed to comply with the directions of the Supreme Court issued in the judgment in Mohd. Sohrab Khan vs. Aligarh Muslim University and others 2009, wherein it was held that a Master's degree in Industrial Chemistry is not directly suitable for the post of Lecturer (Chemistry) unless explicitly stated in the advertisement It may be noted that in the Sohrab Khan judgment, a specific direction was issued to the University that in future advertisements, they should lay down the exact essential qualifications indicating the allied subject and subject stream that is required to be mentioned when making an application for the said post. On the other hand, Advocate Tirath Raj Shukla, appearing for the University administration, contended that the ambiguity had been resolved, and since candidates were appointed under later advertisements in 2022, the instant petition was no longer relevant. Against this backdrop of these submissions, the single judge, at the outset, noted that the University failed to comply with the Apex Court's judgment in the Sohrab Khan judgement; their actions were, on the face of it, “arbitrary”. It observed: “…on one hand, they have adopted that M.Sc. Industrial Chemistry would fall within “allied subject”, therefore, treated it to be an eligibility for consideration for the post of Lecturer (Chemistry), however, an arbitrary decision was taken that their candidature will be considered in the last if the candidates having M.Sc. (Chemistry) were not available or not found suitable”. Regarding the relief sought in the matter, the bench noted that during the pendency of this writ petition, i.e., for the last five years, much water has flown, and posts have already been filled up. The Court noted that since their selection is not under challenge, therefore, relief sought in the present writ petition had been rendered infructuous. The single judge, however, disposed of the plea with a direction to the University to follow the Top Court's judgement in Mohd. Sohrab Khan “in its letter and spirit”. The High Court directed the Registrar, AMU, to “remain cautious in future” while publishing advertisements, choosing the words in the same, and removing ambiguity in them. In other words, the university has been asked to choose the words in the advertisement carefully, and instead of using ambiguous words like “concerned/relevant/allied subject,” the University must specifically mention qualifications so that all eligible candidates may...

'Avoid Ambiguity, Specify Essential Qualification': Allahabad HC Directs AMU To Ensure Clarity In Future Advertisements For Lecturer Posts

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

'Avoid Ambiguity, Specify Essential Qualification': Allahabad HC Directs AMU To Ensure Clarity In Future Advertisements For Lecturer Posts

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sparsh Upadhyay

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers