Eligibility Of Researcher For Any Post Determined By Acceptance Of Research Paper For Publication Rather Than Actual Publication: Bombay High Court

The Bombay High Court recently held that only the acceptance of a research paper for publication in a journal is relevant rather than actual publication to determine the author’s eligibility for any post or qualification.

The division bench of Justice Sunil B. Shukre and Justice Vrushali V. Joshi observed that the worthiness of the paper for publication determines eligibility.

“In our view, it is only the fitness or worthiness of research paper for its publication, which comes from a decision of it’s acceptance for publication, which should determine the issue of eligibility of the researcher for a particular post or qualification”.

The court set aside MPSC’s decision declaring an Associate Professor ineligible for the post of Professor of Cardiology because his fourth research paper was published after the due date. The court observed that the paper had been accepted for publication before the due date.

“Once it is established on record that the Medical Council of India considers the research papers accepted for publication as eligible for various posts and it is found that the fourth research paper of the petitioner was accepted for publication on 19.8.2021, much before the due date of 26.8.2021, the Committee of Experts could not have found the petitioner to be not eligible on the ground that the publication of the research paper of the petitioner was after the said due date”, the court held.

The petitioner is an Associate Professor working with Super Speciality Hospital Government Medical College, Nagpur. He applied for the post of Professor of Cardiology. However, the MPSC found him ineligible to take part in the selection process. The Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT) dismissed his challenge to MPSC’s decision. Hence the present petition.

During the course of litigation, the court directed the MPSC to examine petitioner’s request to be considered eligible. Despite this direction, neither the expert committee nor the MPSC considered the issue afresh, the court said. MPSC rejected the petitioner’s claim on the ground that only one research out of four research papers was as per the National Medical Council Rules.

The court again directed MPSC to refer the petitioner’s claim to the committee of experts. The committee accepted that the publication of three papers is as per Rules and the petitioner was ineligible only because the fourth paper was published after the due date.

Guidelines issued by the Medical Council of India (MCI) provide that the requirement of publication of a research paper in the prescribed journal is fulfilled not only by its actual publication but also by the acceptance for publication though it may not have been actually published.

The court noted that the petitioner’s fourth paper was accepted for publication by the Editor of International Journal Of Scientific Research on August 19, 2021, i.e., before the due date of the application.

The state contended that the acceptance letter was addressed only to petitioner’s co-author. However, the court considered another communication which indicated the acceptance of the research paper and was addressed to both the co-authors including the petitioner. “Even otherwise, addressing of a communication to one of two authors in a case like this would not negate the fact that the research paper in question has been accepted for publication before the due date as the paper is written by two authors, the petitioner being the first author and Mr. Rajput the co-author”, the court added.

The court said that actual publication is only a consequence of the decision to accept the research paper for publication. It may happen immediately or after a gap of several days, months, or even years.

“That apart publication of any research paper, which is already accepted for publication depends various factors such as availability of space in the journal, frequency of the journal and so on. These things are not within the control of the researcher and, in fact, should not matter for determining the eligibility of a researcher for a particular post or qualification”, the court observed.

The court said that the MCI guidelines show that it accepts that only the worthiness of research paper for publication matters and not the actual publication.

The court said that the scrutiny Committee committed serious error of fact and law and misdirected itself by considering something which is irrelevant for deciding the issue. Further, MPSC mechanically followed the decision when it should have rejected it.

Therefore, the court quashed the order of the MAT and the decision of the MPSC. It declared the petitioner eligible for the post of Professor in Cardiology under the Maharashtra Medical Education and Research Service Group A and directed the MPSC to allow him to participate in the selection process.

Advocate A. A. Naik represented the petitioner while AGP D. L. Dharmadhikari represented the state.

Case no. – Writ Petition No. 1383/2022

Case Title – Dr. Sunil s/o Nilkanth Washimkar v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Bom) 106