SARVODAYA SHIKSHAN MANDAL Vs. UNIVERSITY & COLLEGE TRIBUNAL
LAWS(BOM)-2017-6-23
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY (AT: NAGPUR)
Decided on June 07,2017

Sarvodaya Shikshan Mandal Appellant
VERSUS
University And College Tribunal Respondents

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 Appeal No.N-2/2005.
(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 consequential benefits.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.