ASHOK KUMAR SINHA ROY Vs. UNIVERSITY OF KALYANI
LAWS(CAL)-2013-3-75
HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA
Decided on March 08,2013

Ashok Kumar Sinha Roy Appellant
VERSUS
UNIVERSITY OF KALYANI Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This application is at the instance of a staff having the present designation as Ex-cadre Grade-A of the respondent university and is filed for a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to revoke, cancel, withdraw and rescind the letter dated 8th/11th February, 1991 issued by the Registrar, University of Kalyani and to absorb the petitioner in any post commensurate with the status and qualification of the petitioner and to place the petitioner in any scale of pay not below Rs.550-1470 as it stood in terms of Revision of Pay and Allowance Rules, 1981 and other consequential benefits.
(2.) The following facts are not in dispute:- i. The petitioner was appointed Assistant Teacher in Chemistry in the Kalyani University Experimental High School at Kalyani temporarily against a lien and his period of appointment was extended subsequently. Thereafter, he was appointed Assistant Teacher of the said school w.e.f. April 27, 1982. ii. He was later confirmed in the said post of Assistant Teacher. Then in December 1986 the Government of West Bengal took over the said school as a Government Sponsored Institution w.e.f. January 1987. iii. An option was given to the teachers and the staff of the said school to the effect that if they were not willing to serve the Sponsored Institution, they should be absorbed by the University as its own staff. iv. The petitioner exercised his option and accordingly, he was posted in the Personnel Section of the Registrar's Department in the University of Kalyani. v. The petitioner has contended that the job assigned to him was mere clerical in nature and as such, he requested the respondents to allot teaching duties, which would be in conformity with his educational qualification and experience. The respondents did not take any action in the matter. vi. Ultimately he filed a writ being W.P.12554 (W) of 1988. While disposing the same, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kalyanmoy Ganguly (as His Lordship then was) directed the respondent university to consider the application of the writ petitioner for the post sympathetically and to allot specific duties commensurate with the status and educational qualification of the petitioner. In October 1990, the petitioner was designated as Assistant GradeA and his pay was fixed in a scale provided for the staff of the respondent university. vii. Then the petitioner filed a writ petition being C.O. No.14478 (W) of 1990 and the said writ petition was disposed of by Hon'ble Justice K.M. Yusuf (as His Lordship then was) directing the respondents to see that the pay scale of the petitioner was fully protected and not reduced as per Memo dated June 8, 1990 issued by the Registrar of the respondent university and also to check up again whether the status and position of the petitioner were commensurate with the previous status and qualification as Assistant Teacher. viii. Then the respondent university reiterated its decision to designate the petitioner as Ex-cadre Assistant Grade-A and held the observation that the petitioner was not a member of the teaching staff of the university. ix. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a contempt petition which was disposed of holding the respondent university guilty on contempt, but, the respondent university filed an appeal and the Hon'ble Division Bench set aside the order of contempt, but, holding that the writ petitioner was at liberty to challenge the aforesaid action of the registrar in an appropriate proceeding. x. However, in compliance with the order dated December 18, 1990 passed by the Hon'ble Justice K.M. Yusuf, the respondent university informed the petitioner by the letter dated 8th/11th February, 1991 that he was not a teacher of the university and as such, the question of revised pay scale of the teacher of the State aided school did not arise. He was also informed that the post of educational statistics as being performed by the writ petitioner was commensurate with his previous status and qualification.
(3.) Being aggrieved by such letter this application has been preferred.;


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