SARVODAYA SHIKSHAN MANDAL Vs. UNIVERSITY & COLLEGE TRIBUNAL
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AT: NAGPUR)
Sarvodaya Shikshan Mandal
University And College Tribunal
Click here to view full judgement.
INDIRA JAIN, J. -
(1.) This petition takes an exception to the judgment
and order dated 20.12.2007 passed by the learned Presiding
Officer of the University and College Tribunal, Nagpur in
(2.) The facts giving rise to the petition may be stated in brief as under :
Respondent no.2 was appointed on temporary
basis as a part time peon in petitioner no.2 college run by
petitioner no.1-management. The appointment order was
issued on 15.4.1985. In 1995, due to separation of law
faculty an independent college by name Shantaram
Potdukhe College of Law was established. Petitioner no.2
proposed the names of employees including the name of
respondent no.2 to the Joint Director of Higher Education
seeking approval to their names as at the relevant time
sanctioned strength of peons had increased. The name of
respondent no.2 was not approved by the Joint Director and
directions were given to absorb the surplus non-teaching
staff from another college to the newly established college.
As name of respondent no.2 was not approved, vacancy had
ceased to be a clear vacancy and consequently the services
of respondent no.2 automatically came to an end.
(3.) Respondent no.2 filed appeal before the University and College Tribunal, Nagpur alleging therein that his
services were terminated vide letter dated 28.2.1997 and
sought reinstatement with back wages. It was the case of
respondent no.2 before the Tribunal that he was duly
qualified to be appointed as Class-IV employee and as his
work was satisfactory, his services were continued from time
to time on yearly basis by issuing fresh appointment orders.
He also submitted that instead of issuing him appointment
order as a full time employee and increasing his salary, his
services were terminated and he made representations to
the college authority as he served for more than 12 years in
the college. The main grievance of respondent no.2 before
the Tribunal was that termination dated 28.2.1997 was bad
in law and he is entitled to reinstatement with all
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.