Bhubaneswar High Court Upholds Recruitment Process for Assistant Professors
Background of the Case
The Orissa High Court recently declined to intervene in the recruitment process for assistant professors in the super-speciality stream, confirming that no illegalities were found in the advertisement issued by the State Government.
Allegations of Reservation Issues
Two candidates from reserved categories challenged the Government advertisement, claiming it failed to allocate reservations for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe candidates in the selection process for assistant professors in super-speciality posts.
Court’s Findings
The bench, led by Justice Biraja Prasanna Satpathy, held that the advertisement was compliant with legal standards. According to reports from The Hindu, the Odisha Public Service Commission had issued an advertisement in 2021 for the recruitment of assistant professors in super-speciality areas. The petitioners contended that the selection process was flawed, stating, “No reservation was provided for any of the candidates belonging to reserve category and all the 19 posts so advertised were meant for unreserved candidates.”
State Government’s Defense
During the proceedings, the State Government defended its stance by asserting that these assistant professor positions in super-speciality do not require reservation, as they are not considered base-level posts. Government counsel argued that, in accordance with Medical Council of India standards, assistant professors in super-speciality are classified under Level 12, while those in broad speciality are under Level 11.
Court’s Conclusion
Justice Satpathy acknowledged the submissions from both parties, referencing previous decisions in the cases of Indra Sawhney, Preeti Srivastav, and the Faculty Association of AIIMS. He concluded that no actions had been taken by the State regarding the applicability of reservations for assistant professors in super-speciality roles. Consequently, the court determined that no illegality or irregularity occurred in the advertisement issued by the Government or the Odisha Public Service Commission.
Final Ruling
The bench ultimately ruled against interfering in the recruitment process, stating, “Accordingly, this court is not inclined to interfere with the recruitment process so undertaken by the Commission pursuant to the advertisement. Consequentially, both the writ petitions fail and are dismissed accordingly.”
Related Developments
Additionally, the Orissa High Court has recently ruled that denying a passport NOC due to a disciplinary case infringes upon a doctor’s right to travel and liberty.