H.N. Tilhari, J. - (1.) This is plaintiff's second appeal, arising out of judgment and decree dated 14th July, 1979/6th September, 1979 given in regular civil appeal no. 91 of 1977 Shyam Bihari Mishra v. Roorkee University, Saharanpur and another , dismissing the plaintiff's first appeal and affirming the judgment and decree dated 26-2-1977 delivered in regular suit no. 503 of 1968, dismissing the plaintiff's suit for declaratory decree, declaring that the termination of the plaintiff's services from the post of Lecturer of Roorkee University was illegal and ultra vires and that he still continues to be in service as the Lecturer. The plaintiff further claimed that the decree for a sum of Rs. 744.83 on account of arrears of salary due to the plaintiff upto the date of termination which the plaintiff has described as the wrong termination of his service. In addition thereto the plaintiff has prayed for grant of such other further relief as the court deems fit and proper.
(2.) The plaintiff's case as per plaint allegation has been that he had been initially appointed as a Lecturer in Chemistry for a period of four months against an interim vacancy and he joined the post on 26-12-1961. Thereafter his appointment was extended till 31-5-1962. The plaintiff's case is that even after the said period his services were continued under the direction of the Incharge, Chemistry Department and he was required to appear for an interview on June 22, 1962 for the post of Lecturer in Chemistry in the grade of Rs. 400-30-640-E.B.-40-800/- and that the plaintiff did appear before the Selection Committee which recommended his claim and name in the second preference against leave vacancy of Dr. B.R. Agrawal, Reader in the Chemistry Department and on this appointment he was allowed to continue on the post till the joining of regularly selected candidate. The plaintiff has further stated in the plaint that on enquiry being made from the Registrar by letter dated 4-4-1963 about the nature of his appointment the plaintiff was informed by the Registrar vide the letter dated April 17, 1963 that he was working against the leave vacancy of Dr. B.R. Agrawal, Reader in Chemistry. The plaintiff further alleged that in terms of letter No. EST./3006/E-85 Chemistry dated 25-6-1963 the plaintiff was again required by the Registrar to appear before the Selection Committee to be held on July 22, 1963 for the post of Lecturer in Chemistry in the grade of Rs. 400-30-640-E.B. 40-800 and the petitioner did appear before the Selection Committee but the result of that Selection Committee was not communicated to him. However, sometimes in April 1965 the plaintiff came to know that he had been appointed in the leave vacancy of Sri R.G. Goel by the Syndicate of University on the recommendation of the said Selection Committee. The plaintiff has further alleged that by another communication letter dated Est./2266/E-85 Chemistry dated May 15, 1964 the Registrar again required the plaintiff-appellant to appear before the Selection Committee to be held on May 30, 1964 for the post of Lecturer in Chemistry and the plaintiff did appear as a departmental candidate and during the interview the plaintiff was informed that the said post of Lecturer in Chemistry in the grade of Rs. 250-25-400-E.B.-30-700-E.B.-50-850 in connection with which he was required to appear before the Selection Committee on 30-5-64 but as the selection departmental candidate was said to be restricted and confined to a candidate specialised in Organic Chemistry whereas the plaintiff had specialised in the Physical Chemistry and as such instead of the plaintiff Dr. V.K. Mahesh was selected for that post. Though as a matter of fact the said post was not restricted for a candidate who had specialised in Organic Chemistry and the plaintiff's claim for the said post was overlooked on that pretext. The plaintiff has further alleged in the plaint that on September 8, 1964 the plaintiff received a letter no. Chemistry/Opp/64-04 from the head of the Chemistry Department enclosing a copy of the letter No. Est.-7555/E-1122 dated September 4, 1964 from the Registrar informing the plaintiff that the plaintiff's services would no longer be required on the return of Dr. B.R. Agrawal from training abroad, in whose vacancy the plaintiff was alleged to be serving. It was by itself contrary to the Syndicate Resolution No. 58(1) dated August 22, 1963 (under the Supplementary Agenda Item No. 25 (1) under which the plaintiff was appointed to work in the leave vacancy of Sri R.G. Goel which was no longer a leave vacancy.
(3.) The plaintiff has further averred that subsequently by Office Memorandum dated January 30, 1965 the plaintiff was informed by the Registrar that his services would no longer be required by the University beyond 31-3-1965 and the plaintiff should submit no dues certificate to the Accounts Section before his being relieved but later on vide the letter dated April 5, 1965 of Registrar, addressed to the Professor and Head of the Chemistry Department that on his recommendation the services of plaintiff were extended upto April 14, 1965 when Dr. B.R. Agrawal would join. The plaintiff's further case is that while issuing above mentioned letters the Registrar overlooked that in fact subsequently by the Selection Committee meeting dated July 22, 1963 the plaintiff had been selected on the post of Lecturer in the leave vacancy of Sri R.G. Goel and name of the plaintiff was recommended for the appointment in the leave vacancy of Sri R.G. Goel and those recommendations of the Selection Committee had been confirmed by the University Syndicate in its meeting held on August 22, 1963.;