UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION Vs. DINANATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Letters Patent Appeal is preferred by the appellant, i.e.. University Grants Commission (UGC) against the order dated 15th January, 2002 passed by learned Single Judge in CWP No. 434/99.

(2.) CWP No, 434/99 was filed by the Peons employed by the UGC on adhoc basis. Earlier some LDCs working on adhoc basis in UGC had also filed CWP No.1298/99. In the said CWP the UGC filed counter affidavit to the effect that it had undertaken to give preference to the said LDCs/petitioners in that writ petition for filling up of the posts on regular basis against the existing vacancies as well as vacancies which may arise in future. When CWP No.434/99 came up for hearing on 15th January, 2002 the learned counsel for the UGC made a statement before the learned Single Judge that the decision taken in respect of the LDCs would apply in the case of the Peons as well. Recording that statement, the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition.

(3.) However, it may be stated at this stage that during the pendency of the aforesaid CWP No.434/99 the learned Single Judge had passed an interim order dated 25th January, 1999 directing the UGC not to disengage the petitioners/Peons. The UGC had filed an application for vacating the said ex-parte ad interim order dated 25th January, 1999. While this application was pending the UGC filed another application being CM No.5570/2001 in which it alleged that performance of petitioners 1 and 4 was unsatisfactory and they were deliberately not performing the duties allotted to them. They were taking undue advantage of ad interim order dated 25th January, 1999 and engaging themselves in the acts of insubordination. It was, thus, stated in the said application that the reason for disengaging the petitioners 1 and 4 was not that they were working on adhoc basis but their unsatisfactory work and insubordination. It was further stated in para 10 of the application as under: