MANISH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Grievance of Petitioner in the present Writ Petition is that since Petitioner was working as a Contractual Assistant Professor under Respondent no.3 for the academic session 2019-20, the Respondents should not be permitted to replace the Petitioner by another temporary faculty.

(2.) Contention of learned Counsel for Petitioner is that Petitioner has undergone a due process of selection for being appointed as an Assistant Professor and that the service of Petitioner also was satisfactory as there is no complaint whatsoever, so far as the competency of Petitioner is concerned. Further contention of learned Counsel for Petitioner is that that now that the academic session is over, the Respondents should not be permitted to go in for a fresh recruitment process for filling up of the post of Guest Lecturer under Respondent No.3 for the subject in which the Petitioner was taking classes.

(3.) Learned Counsel for Petitioner relies upon the judgment of this Court passed in the case of "Manju Gupta & others v. State of Chhattisgarh & others" WPS No. 4406/2016, decided on 27.02.2017, whereby the similarly placed Guest Lecturers under the Director (Industrial Training Institute) have been granted protection from being replaced by another set of Guest Lecturers.