G.D. DEORARI Vs. STATE OF U.P.
LAWS(UTN)-2012-7-61
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on July 10,2012

G.D. Deorari Appellant
VERSUS
State of U.P. and others Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology Pant Nagar gave appointment to the petitioner Nos. 1 and 3 on 2nd September, 2000 making it clear that their appointments shall be only up to 31st March, 2002. On 12th October, 1999, G.B. Pant University selected petitioner no. 2 for appointing him on contractual basis. According to the letter dated 12th October, 1999, written by G.B. Pant University to petitioner no. 2, formal appointment letter was to be issued after petitioner no. 2 had executed the contract. It has not been pleaded in any of the pleadings filed by the petitioners that the contract, pursuant to the letter dated 12th October, 1999, entered by petitioner no. 2 is still continuing. It appears that when the petitioners were, thus, appointed, the effective control of G.B. Pant University was with the State of Uttar Pradesh. On 9th November, 2000, the State of Uttar Pradesh was bifurcated for the purpose of creation of the State of Uttarakhand. G.B. Pant University had the principal establishment within the territory, which became a part of the State of Uttarakhand after bifurcation of the State of Uttar Pradesh. The said University also had certain establishments, which continued to remain within the territory of the State of Uttar Pradesh even after its bifurcation. There is no dispute that each of the petitioners was appointed in those establishments of G.B. Pant University, which remained within the territory of the State of Uttar Pradesh even after its bifurcation. It appears that on 5th May, 2000, Uttar Pradesh Krishi and Pradhyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya (Sansodhan) Adhiniyam, 2000 was enacted. In terms thereof, the area of jurisdiction of G.B. Pant University was determined, while the jurisdiction of Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel Krishi and Prodhyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya was also determined. By reason of the said Act, G.B. Pant University ceased to have any jurisdiction over the areas, in which it had establishments and where the petitioners were working and Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel Krishi and Prodhyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya became entitled to exercise jurisdiction over those places, where the petitioners were then working.
(2.) It also appears that on 13th December, 2000, until further orders, the establishments of G.B. Pant University situate within the State of Uttar Pradesh over which Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel Krishi and Prodhyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya became entitled to exercise jurisdiction were given under the administrative control of Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel Krishi and Prodhyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya, but the administrative control over the staff was given to the Special Executive Officer, Meerut. Subsequent thereto, it appears that on 27th March, 2003 G.B. Pant University, Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel Krishi and Prodhyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya, the State of Uttar Pradesh and the State of Uttarakhand agreed to the effect that people working in the establishments of G.B. Pant University, which have been handed over to Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel Krishi and Prodhyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya will become employees of Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel Krishi and Prodhyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya. This decision has been assailed in the writ petition, principally on the ground that without the consent of the petitioners, their employers could March, 2002. Therefore, it would not be possible for us to direct G.B. Pant University to take either of the petitioners in its employment. On the other hand, fact remains that the employment of the petitioners was accepted, acknowledged, extended, confirmed and reconfirmed by Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel Krishi and Prodhyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya after 2002 and, accordingly, by reason thereof, they became not transfer their employment to another employer. We think that the proposition of law propounded by the petitioners is unassailable. A contract of employment is a contract of personal nature. That is not assignable in view of the fact that there is no concept of subrogation in the matter to discharge of contractual obligations thereunder. Therefore, neither G.B. Pant University could transfer the employment of the petitioners to Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel Krishi and Prodhyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya, nor Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel Krishi and Prodhyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya could compel the petitioners to discharge their contractual obligations owing to their employer G.B. Pant University for and on account of Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel Krishi and Prodhyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya. Neither the State Government of Uttar Pradesh nor the State of Uttarakhand could transfer the employments in question. They had and have no such power in the ordinary course of business. They could do so in exercise of their statutory power. They did not, however, exercise such power. In the circumstances, transfer purported to have been made of the employments of the petitioners from G.B. Pant University to Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel Krishi and Prodhyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya is per se illegal and anything provided in the order dated 27th March, 2003 in that regard is also per se illegal. The question is, what the petitioners could achieve on the basis of the declaration, as above? As aforesaid, it is not in the know of the Court, the length of the contractual period of service of petitioner no. 2. Insofar as the other petitioners are concerned, their employment with G.B. Pant University came to an end in terms of their appointment letters on 31st estopped from contending that the petitioners are no longer their employees. The conclusion would be that despite having had obtained the declaration, as above, the employment of the petitioners remained attached with Sardar Ballabh Bhai Patel Krishi and Prodhyogiki Vishwavidhyalaya. With the observations, as above, the writ petition is disposed of.;


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