K G DEVRAJ Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN all these petitions, the petitioners have questioned the legality and validity of the orders passed on various dates by the Competent authority, terminating their services from the respective posts held by them as Instructors/lecturers/technicians in BSF Institute of technology with a further direction, directing respondents to give all the benefits, emoluments, salaries and other legal benefits flowing therefrom to these petitioners.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that, petitioners herein were appointed as Instructors/lecturers/technicians in the Border Security force (BSF) Institute of Technology, which is affiliated to AICTE. In pursuance of the notification issued by the Competent Authority, these petitioners have attended their interviews and thereafter, they have been appointed. Accordingly, the appointment orders have also been issued subject to certain 12 conditions. Thereafter, probationary period has been declared by the Competent Authority in respect of all the petitioners in first six petitions, but so far as petitioner in Writ Petition no. 34498 of 1999 is concerned, he has been appointed purely on temporary basis and his probationary period is not confirmed. The reason assigned for terminating the services of these petitioners by the respondents is that, the BSF Education Fund Society, New Delhi has taken a decision to discontinue the Aircraft Maintenance Engineering course CAME' for short) for the academic year 1998-99 on account of poor response from the candidates in respect of the said course. As a result of the same, it was not possible to utilise the services of these petitioners gainfully. Therefore, after obtaining necessary approval from the Competent Authority, the respective courses in which these petitioners have been appointed and were working, have been abolished. As a consequence thereof, the respective posts have also been abolished. Hence, the Competent Authority, on the ground that, there are no takers for the said course and that there is no demand from the candidates for the said course, taking into consideration the financial constraints and maintenance of the infrastructure and the libraries etc. , has abolished the respective posts held by these petitioners. Consequently, the termination orders have been issued in accordance with the conditions imposed in the memorandum of appointment order issued to these petitioners. In view of unilateral decision taken by the competent Authority for terminating the services of these petitioners, without conducting enquiry and without affording any opportunity and in gross violation of the principles of natural justice, these petitioners felt necessitated to present the instant writ petitions.

(3.) THE principal submission canvassed by Sri Vigneshwar Shastri, learned Counsel appearing for all the petitioners except petitioner in writ Petition No. 34498 of 1999 and Sri N. R. Naik, learned Counsel appearing for petitioner in Writ Petition No. 34498 of 1999 is that, the termination of services of petitioners are highly arbitrary, illegal and is in total violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Further, Sri vigneshwar Shastri vehemently submitted that, since the services of the petitioners have been confirmed, they are all entitled for protection of their services/employment and as such their termination under the guise of abolition of posts is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the constitution of India. He submitted that, if the order of termination is perused carefully, it is clear that, it is not abolition of post but the same is 'termination simpliciter" which is passed in clear violation of the principles of natural justice. If the abolition of posts were to be made, then, there must have been approval from the Competent Authority and the same must be done in good faith and not as a mask of some penal civil consequences.