Radhika T. vs. Cochin University of Science and Technology & Ors.
Background
The appellant, a Scheduled Caste candidate, applied for a single vacant post of Associate Professor (Inorganic Chemistry) at Cochin University of Science and Technology and was ranked second on the resulting waiting list, behind another Scheduled Caste candidate, Dr. Anitha, who was appointed. When Dr. Anitha resigned after working for over a year, the appellant claimed she should be appointed from the waiting list under Section 31(10) of the Cochin University of Science and Technology Act, 1986, which keeps a waiting list operative for two years. The university instead applied its communal rotation policy under Section 31(11) of the same Act and assigned the resulting vacancy to the next category in the rotation cycle (Latin Catholic/Anglo-Indian), rejecting the appellant's claim. Her writ petition, writ appeal, and review petition before the Kerala High Court were all dismissed, leading to this appeal.
Decision Breakdown
The Supreme Court held that Sections 31(10) and 31(11) of the University Act must be read harmoniously: the waiting list mechanism under sub-section (10) does not override the communal rotation policy under sub-section (11). Since the original post had already been filled by a Scheduled Caste candidate (Dr. Anitha) who served for over a year before resigning, the vacancy created by her resignation properly triggered the rotation policy, obliging the university to allot the post to the next category in the roster (Latin Catholic/Anglo-Indian) rather than to the next-ranked candidate on the waiting list, since the appellant did not belong to that category. The Court found the appellant's argument, though initially attractive, did not survive scrutiny, and dismissed both appeals, affirming the High Court's judgment and review order, with costs made easy (i.e., no costs order against either side).
Lesson Learnt
A waiting list from a recruitment round does not automatically entitle the next-ranked candidate to a vacancy that later opens up. Where a rotation or roster policy governs how successive vacancies in a reserved post are to be filled, that policy operates alongside (and can override) the simple seniority of the waiting list.