TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (1) TMI 1290
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....again issued for the post of Professor, Marine Science. The hand-out distributed to the applicants prescribed the minimum qualifications as: "An eminent scholar with public work of high quality actively engaged in research with 10 years of experience in post graduate teaching and/or research at the University/National level Institution including experience of guiding research at doctoral level. OR An outstanding scholar with established reputation which significant contribution to knowledge." 4. Additional qualifications prescribed by the University Grants Commission were also stated as: "Specialisation: M.Sc., Ph.D. in Marine Science or any related subject with outstanding accomplishments of teaching and research in branches of Marine Science, Marine Biology, Marine Biotechnology Marine Geology, Chemical Oceanography or Physical Oceanography with a proven record of publications in international journals". 5. Both the appellant and the respondent No. 5 applied for the post. Both of them were Readers in the Department of Marine Science, the respondent No. 5 being senior most. Both were called for interviews on 13th September 1995. 6. Sometime before the date of the intervi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....No. 2 would not be participating in the selection process. This has been denied by the appellant and the University. 10. On 13th September 1995, interviews were held as scheduled. However, the respondent No. 2 did not take part in the selection process. The Selection Committee found that neither the appellant nor the respondent No. 5 were suitable for the post. 11. In October 1995, a fresh advertisement was issued for the post. This time, although the essential qualifications as advertised in 1994 remained the same, the additional qualifications were amended so that the specialisation read: "Professor of Marine Science: Specialisation: Any branch of Marine Sciences, namely physical Oceanography, Marine Chemistry, Marine Geology or Marine Geology or Marine Biology." 12. The requirement of 'M.Sc.-Ph.D. in Marine Science or any related subject with outstanding accomplishment of Teaching and Research and also with proven record of publications in international journals' was done away with. 13. A fresh Selection Committee was constituted pursuant to the 1995 advertisement. It met on 20th May 1996. This time the respondent No. 2 participated. The Committee recommended the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....running of the University by Statutes framed under Sections 22 and 23, Ordinances under Section 24 and Regulations under Section 25. Under the Act, the Lt. Governor of the Union Territory has been constituted ex- officio Visitor of the University. By virtue of an amendment to the Act in 2000, the Visitor is now known as the Chancellor of the University. The Chancellor is the Head of the University. Among the authorities of the University, we are concerned with the Executive Council and the Academic Council. The Executive Council is the principal executive body of the University (Section 18) and is empowered by Section 23(2) to make Statutes subject to the approval of the Chancellor dealing with a range of subjects including the appointment of teachers and other academic staff of the University. The Academic Council is, on the other hand, the principal academic body of the University and is mandated to 'subject to the provisions of the Act, the Statutes and Ordinances, co-ordinate and exercise general supervision over the academic policies of the University'. 19. The first Statutes of the University are set out in the Schedule to the Act. They have been amended from time to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....not be allowed to now contend that the eligibility criteria were wrongly framed. 23. We then come to the question of the qualifications of the appellant and whether he was qualified to have at all been considered for appointment to the post of Professor. 24. If we analyse the 1995 advertisement and hand-out it will be seen that the minimum qualifications prescribed for a candidate were that he/she had to be: (a) an eminent scholar; (b) with work of high quality; (c) actively engaged in research; (d) with 10 years' experience in post-graduate teaching and/or research at the University/ national level institution including experience of guiding research at doctoral level OR (a) an outstanding scholar (b) with established reputation; (c) with significant contribution to knowledge. 25. For a candidate to be qualified under the second limb, apart from a brilliant academic record and having an established standing, the candidate must have been responsible for original research which had added to the field of the particular science, not in small measure but significantly. The appellant has not sought to justify his appointment under this limb but has claimed that he....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wards the 10 years experience clause. So did the respondent No. 5. When the respondent No. 5 applied for the post when it was advertised in 1994 he did not have 10 years cumulative experience of teaching and post doctoral research. Since he had obtained a doctorate degree in November 1985, the University also considered his application and called him for an interview in September 1985 though according to a strict interpretation of the eligibility criteria the respondent No. 5 was not qualified. Finally in Dr. Kumar Bar Das V. Utkal University 1999 (1) SCC 453, this Court in construing similar eligibility criteria has held (at p. 458) that the research required could include pre-doctoral research experience. 29. Then it was said that the Selection Committee was faultily constituted. Statute 15 has already been quoted earlier. According to the Registrar's affidavit, the Academic Council had prepared a panel of subject experts and forwarded it to the Executive Council. The panel as approved by the Executive Council was (1) Prof. Subba Rao or Prof. V.V. Modi ; (2) Dr. J. Samant or Dr. D. Chandramohan; (3) Prof. K.T. Damodaran or Prof. R.K. Banerjee, Prof. Subba Rao and Prof. V.V. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....when there was no allegation even on the part of the respondent No. 5 that Dr. Chandramohan did not in fact sit on the Selection Committee. 32. This brings us to the issue of bias. 33. Bias may be generally defined as partiality or preference. It is true that any person or authority required to act in a judicial or quasi-judicial matter must act impartially. "If however, 'bias' and 'partiality' be defined to mean the total absence of preconceptions in the mind of the judge, then no one has ever had a fair trial and no one ever will. The human mind, even at infancy, is no blank piece of paper. We are born with predispositions and the processes of education, formal and informal, create attitudes which precede reasoning in particular instances and which, therefore, by definition, are prejudices". 34. It is not every kind of bias which in law is taken to vitiate an act. It must be a prejudice which is not founded on reason, and actuated by self interest whether pecuniary or personal. Because of this element of personal interest, bias is also seen as an extension of the principle of natural justice that no man should be a judge in his own cause. Being a state of mind....