S K NARAYANAN Vs. INDIAN INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AHMEDABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A short question which arises in this petition is whether fresh application is maintainable in respect of the same cause of action when no liberty is reserved for filing fresh application at the time of withdrawal of the earlier petition. The question arises in the context of the reliefs which have been inter alia prayed by the present petitioner who was at all the relevant times of this petition as well as the earlier one was working as Assistant Warden in the Indian Institute of Management (hereinafter referred to as the IIM) respondent No. 1 herein. By this petition he prays for appropriate writs orders and directions quashing and setting aside the order dated October 15/17 1981 rejecting his representation of September 25 1981 for permitting him to retain the present accommodation allotted to him by the respondent Institute. The necessary facts which require recapitulation for appreciating the question in the proper perspective are as under:-

(2.) The respondent-Institute is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act 1860 and is also registered as a public trust under the Bombay Public Trusts Act as adopted by the State of Gujarat. The affairs of the said Institute are under general supervision directions and control of the Governing Body of the Society known as Board of Governors. The petitioner who holds Masters degree in Economics and who is a retired Army Service man after serving in the Delhi University for about three years as a Warden Incharge of Post-Graduate Hostel joined the said respondent Institute on August 10 1970 on his selection held pursuant to the advertisement issued by the IIM. He was appointed as Assistant Warden on a basic salary of Rs. 400/- per month in the time scale of Rs. 400 vide appointment order dated July 21 1970 which was revised to Rs. 700-1300. Besides the basic salary he was entitled according to the conditions of his appointment to all usual allowances admissible to other employees of the Institute and to the benefit of contributory provident fund. The other fringe benefits included free unfurnished accommodation on the campus of the IIM in lieu of house rent allowance. As regards his other service conditions they are subject to such byelaws and rules of the IIM as may be in force from time to time. The Petitioner claims that as an Assistant Warden he was incharge of the supervision of post-graduate students hostel including mess and canteen catering to the students and the faculty members and the staff of the Institute. He was also supposed to control hostel-stores accounts and the staff attached to him. He was particularly assigned the supervision of executive development programmes participants accommodation etc. It is his grievance that since June 1975 a systematic and consistent campaign of harassment was launched against him in course of which he was gradually stripped of many important functions duties and powers against which he was compelled to protest and remonstrate which naturally offended the authorities.

(3.) In terms of Rule 3 of the Allotment of quarters of the Institute the petitioner was allotted quarter No. 402 in the category of Type-IV houses by the IIM which was reserved for Assistant Warden incharge of the hostel whose presence in the campus is considered essential for administrative convenience and maintaining essential services for the hostel. The petitioner claims that his predecessor one Mr. K. S. Murthy was also allotted this very quarter though the officers and Assistant Professors carrying similar time scale as that of the petitioner and his predecessor namely Rs. 700-1250 were allotted Type-III houses. It appears that the Institute framed new rules for allotment of quarters as detailed in the letter of the Administrative Officer dated February 29 1980 addressed to the members of the Staff of the Institute prescribing new norms for allotment of campus houses for various categories of Staff. The proposed revised norms inter alia provided the allotment of Type-II houses to the members of the staff within the basic pay range of Rs. 1100-1499. In terms of these revised norms the authorities of the Institute asked the Petitioner to shift to Type-IIA quarter by letter of the Administrative Officer of March 27 1980 since Type II quarters were not constructed. The grievance of the petitioner against this proposed action was two-fold. In the first place the revised norms were merely proposed and in any case were prospective in their operation applicable for allotment of houses after February 21 1980 and in the second place in no case they can unilaterally change the conditions of service as fixed in his appointment order. It appears that the petitioner was required to move this Court by Special Civil Application No. 2194 of 1981 against the order abolishing the post of Assistant Warden held by him. In the said petition the petitioner had prayed for interim relief restraining the Institute from changing his service conditions. However in light of the decision of the respondent-Institute to cancel the said order abolishing the post of Assistant Warden the petitioner claims that he sought permission of this Court for withdrawal of the said Special Civil Application No. 2194/81. This Court (Coram: P. D. Desai J.) by its order of August 18 1981 while disposing of the said petition made a speaking order. The relevant portion of the said order reads as under: