Ashok Bhushan, Ag.CJ Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Government Pleader as well as learned counsel appearing for the 6th respondent. This writ appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 28.11.2014 in WP(C) No.21793 of 2014. The writ petition was filed by the respondent praying for the following reliefs : "i)Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction commanding and compelling the respondents to issue NOC to the petitioner so as to enable the petitioner to pursue higher studies;
ii) Further direction be issued to the selection committee to consider the application of the petitioner even without NOC and give her ranking in the ranked list based on her departmental seniority;
iii) Declare that the action of the respondent in not issuing NOC to the petitioner is highly unjust and illegal and that the 6th respondent has no preferential claim over the petitioner to get admission as he is junior to the petitioner.”
2. First respondent who shall be hereinafter referred to as the writ petitioner, was working as tutor in Anatomy in the appellants institute. The writ petitioner applied for admission in MD Course for the year 2014-15 as in-service candidate. Three seats were reserved for the teachers from private homoeopathic medical colleges, as prescribed in the prospectus. The writ petitioner was selected for the course. She made application to the institution for grant of no objection to join the course. No objection was not issued. The writ petition was filed by the petitioner, in which an interim order was passed, that the petitioner may be permitted to join, for which non-issuance of NOC cannot be an impediment for admission. The petitioner was admitted to the course on 31.10.2014 and is carrying on her studies from 1.11.2014. The writ petition was heard and allowed by the learned single Judge, by judgment dated 28.11.2014. Against which judgment, the institution has come up in writ appeal.
3. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that in the subject of Anatomy, there was only one lecturer and no objection was withheld on account of the fact that permitting the writ petitioner to leave the course at this juncture will cause prejudice to the students. It is submitted that another teacher, to whom no objection was issued, was although junior to the writ petitioner, but was in a different subject. He further submitted that the management has right to withhold no objection on valid grounds and it is not a mere formality as has been observed by the learned Single Judge.
4. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner refuting the submission of learned counsel for the appellant contended that inservice quota is based on seniority and senior most teacher was entitled for admission. The management has granted no objection to a teacher who was junior to the petitioner. Hence there was no occasion to deny no objection to the petitioner. It is submitted that when the petitioner took maternity leave, the college appointed a guest lecturer and carried out the studies, therefore the reason now stated cannot be a ground to refuse the no objection.
5. We have considered the submission of learned counsel for the parties and perused the records. The three seats reserved are for inservice quota from private homoeopathic medical colleges. Of course the writ petitioner who was working as teacher was entitled to apply as in-service category candidate. The fact that the petitioner was selected and has already joined the post graduation course and teaching has started from 1.11.2014, we are of the view that, this is not a case where due to reason that no objection was not granted by the management, she shoul be asked to discontinue the course. It is also not denied that one of the teachers who got selected with the no objection, was junior to her. Earlier when the petitioner took maternity leave, a guest lecturer was appointed. In the facts of the present case, especially the fact that the writ petitioner has already joined the course, we are not inclined to interfere with the judgment of learned Single Judge.
We, however, observe that issue of no objection cannot be said to be a mere formality rather on a valid reason, the management can take a decision regarding grant or non-grant of no objection.
With this observation the writ appeal is dismissed.
Sd/-
ASHOK BHUSHAN, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE.
sou.
// True copy //