Ajay Rastogi , J. - (1.) Instant petitions are directed against order dt.15/12/2010 passed by Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal Jaipur, whereby applications filed by present petitioners U/s 21 of Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Act, 1989 were dismissed; which were filed on the premise that writ petitioners were appointed as Lecturers in their respective subjects pursuant to advertisement issued; however, no appointment orders were issued to either of them and they were not permitted to discharge their duties and were relieved by respondent-Institution w.e.f. 01/05/2010. However, after the reply was filed by respondent-Institution, their appointment/induction in the service of respondent-Institution were disputed and it has been averred that none of writ petitioners was appointed as provided under Scheme of the Rajasthan Non-Govt. Education Institutions Rules, 1993 and there was no relationship between writ petitioners/employees & employer (institution) - in the absence whereof, Rules, 1993 could not be invoked. After taking note of material on record, learned Tribunal finally recorded its finding in para 42 of judgment dt.15/12/2010 and observed that no material has come forward by which it could be inferred that there was any advertisement issued or process being initiated by respondent Institution while allegedly giving appointment to any of writ petitioners; in absence of thereof, question of termination of their services as alleged by each of applicants does not arise and there was no material on record which prima facie was for the writ petitioners to establish, and taking note of submissions, respective applications were dismissed vide order impugned.
(2.) Before the matter came up for admission on 14/03/2011, this Court directed the petitioners to disclose the process being adopted by institution while giving appointment to each of them. Pursuant to order of this Court, additional affidavit has been filed and it has been deposed that notice was affixed on the Notice Board of the Institution for appointment on the post of Lecturer in November, 2008 and the Managing committee after examining the academic qualifications of writ petitioners, found them suitable and gave them appointment on the post of Lecturer in respective subject. But in support of what has been deposed in the affidavit, no prima facie documentary evidence has been placed on record which may substantiate what has been averred in the affidavit filed pursuant to order of the Court.
(3.) The learned Tribunal has also examined in details. Taking note of material placed on record by respective parties, finally finding has been recorded (supra) and even before this Court, there is no material placed on record by which it could be inferred or the affidavit may prima facie disclose about relationship of writ petitioners and respondent Institution or there was any advertisement issued pursuant to which respective writ petitioners were given appointment - in absence whereof, certainly there appears to be no occasion for respondents to terminate their services. Even the certificates placed on record cannot constitute letter of appointment and taking note of material on record, there is no manifest error being committed by the Tribunal while passing the order impugned, warranting interference.;