PARVEEN CHAUDHARY Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By an advertisement issued in July, 1989 Kanya Maha Vidyalaya (Regd.), Fatehpur-Pundr, (Kurukshetra) through its General Secretary (hereinafter called 'the Management') invited applications on a prescribed form for the post of a full-time lady lecturer in Political Science. It was stipulated in the advertisement that the post was against a leave vacancy but the same was likely to be made permanent. The petitioner applied for this post and was called to appear for interview before a Selection Committee on August 9, 1989. The Selection Committee recommended her name for appointment and she was accordingly offered the post. This offer was subject to the condition that her appointment was to be on temporary basis against a leave vacancy upto July 25, 1990 but was likely to be made permanent. It was also subject to the approval of the Kurukshetra University, to which the College stood affiliated. It is not disputed that the appointment of the petitioner was approved by the University as per letter dated September 8, 1989. The petitioner joined as Lecturer in Political Science and the period of her appointment was subsequently extended upto December 31,1990. It may be pointed out that the post of a full time lady Lecturer in Political Science had fallen vacant because one Smt. Jagroop Kaur who was a permanent lecturer had proceeded on long leave and, thereafter, resigned her job. While the petitioner was still working, the Management wrote a letter on March 19,1991 to the Director, Higher Education, Haryana, informing him that Smt. Jagrup Kaur, who had proceeded on extra-ordinary leave, had resigned and a query was made whether the petitioner who was appointed against her leave vacancy was to be relieved or could she be allowed to continue. There is nothing on the record to show as to whether any reply to this letter was received by the Management. It is the admitted case of the parties that the petitioner continued to work as a Lecturer till March 30,1991, when she was relieved from service by an order of the Principal of the College, a copy of which has been attached as Annexure R3/1 with the written statement filed on behalf of the Management, It was at this stage that the petitioner filed the present petition challenging the action of the Principal in terminating her services. The letter dated October 29, 1990 (Annexure P6 with the writ petition) whereby the petitioner was informed that she was not entitled to the salary for the period April, 1990 to July, 1990 and was, therefore, required to deposit an amount of Rs. 12,960/-, was also impugned in the writ petition.

(2.) In the written statement filed on behalf of the Management the afore- mentioned facts have not been disputed. The action of the Principal in terminating the services of the petitioner is, however, sought to be justified on the basis of instructions dated April 8, 1991 issued by the Director Higher Education, Haryana, Chandigarh to the Kurukshetra University in regard to the appointment of Lecturers in non-Government College particularly those appointed against leave vacancies. A copy of these instructions has been attached as Annexure R3/2 with the written statement. According to these instructions if in a non-Government College a Lecturer is appointed against a leave vacancy through a Selection Committee for a regular post, then the appointment would be considered against a leave vacancy and if such a post falls vacant permanently, then it would be advertised and the appointment would be made by a Selection Committee for the regular post after re-advertisement. Respondent No. 2 has also filed her written statement, though respondents 1 and 2 are not directly concerned with the order of termination.

(3.) I have heard counsel for the petitioner at length, who has also taken me through the written statements filed by the respondents. The first contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is that having been appointed for about two years against a leave vacancy, which was likely to be made permanent and through a property constituted Selection Committee, she ought to have been made permanent in terms of the Government instructions dated May 4, 1988 issued to the Kurukshetra University in regard to the appointment of teaching staff in the non-Government affiliated colleges. 1 find force in this submission. It is not disputed that the petitioner was selected for the post of a Lecturer in August, 1989 and she was appointed upto July 25, 1990, which period was later extended upto December 31, 1990. Her appointment was also approved by the University and she had been selected through a regularly constituted Selection Committee. The Government instructions (Annexure P8 with the writ petition, as were then in force when the services of the petitioner were terminated in March, 1991, provided that a teacher appointed in a leave vacancy in a non- Government affiliated College through a properly constituted Selection Committee was to be allowed to continue on regular basis if the post fell vacant due to the resignation of the permanent incumbent. In the present case Smt. Jagrup Kaur had resigned and the petitioner having been appointed through a properly constituted Selection Committee was entitled to be made permanent. The management, on the other hand, has placed reliance on the instructions dated April 8, 1991, which provided that the post in such an eventuality was to be filled up on regular basis after being re-advertised. These instructions, in my opinion, are not applicable as they were issued subsequent to the termination of the services of the petitioner and are otherwise prospective. These instructions specifically provided that "You are requested to take action in future according to these instructions."