Courts Should Be “Extremely Reluctant” To Impose Their Own Views In Academic Appointments
Case: Dr. Satya Narayan Bhujabala & Anr. v. Veer Surendra Sai Institute of Medical Science and Research, Burla and Ors.
Coram: Dr. Justice Sanjeeb Kumar Panigrahi
Case No.: W.P.(C) No. 16290 of 2022 & connected matters
Court Observation: “In the present case, the requirement for chance certificate was let known very categorically in the advertisement issued vide notice no. 225/Director, VIMSAR, Burla dated 19.04.2022 as well as vide a reminder website notice released on 20.05.2022 i.e. five days before the date of original document verification. Hence, this shows the callous attitude of the petitioners. Moreover, chance certificate cannot be considered as an irrelevant document considering that the negative marking attached to it. Therefore, irrespective of its effect on one individual’s marks, it has to be considered as a necessary document which must be verified for securing the candidature.”
“…the Court should be extremely reluctant to substitute its own views as to what is wise, prudent and proper in relation to academic matters in preference to those formulated by professional men possessing technical expertise and rich experience of actual day-to-day working of educational institutions and the departments controlling them. It will be wholly wrong for the Court to make a pedantic and purely idealistic approach to the problems of this nature, isolated from the actual realities and grass-root problems involved in the working of the system and unmindful of the consequences which would emanate if a purely idealistic view as opposed to a pragmatic one were to be propounded.”
Previous Posts
Keywords
Academic Appointments, Extremely Reluctant
