JAMIA HAMDARD Vs. DELHI ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this writ petition is to the award of the Labour Court dated 17th April, 1990 whereby the petitioner was directed to reinstate Dr. K.S. Durrany, respondent No. 3 with full back wages.

(2.) Briefly stated the facts are that respondent No. 3 was a highly qualified person holding the degrees of M.A. and Ph. D. It appears that he applied to the petitioner and was vide letter dated 25th September 1980 appointed as a Research fellow. The petitioner is a deemed university and accordieg to the terms of the said letter, respondent No. 3 was to get Rs. 1300.00 per month consolidated for a period of two years. He was also get accommodation at 10 per cent of the consolidated salary plus Rs. 5.00 for water charges. The work which was to be done by the petitioner was also set out in the said letter and it was as follows :

(3.) According to this letter the appointment of respondent No. 3 was for a period of two years. The letter further stated that on completion of term of fellowship, respondent No. 3 could be considered for permanent appointment in a graded salary. It seem that an extension was granted to respondent No. 3 but subsequently vide letter dated 15th March 1983, respondent No. 3 was informed that his services were no longer required by the petitioner Thereafter the Delhi Admn. referred dispute between the petitioner and respondent No. 3 to the Labour Court. The term of reference was as follows: