ABDUL MUHAMMED RASHEED Vs. M R UNNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This batch of contempt proceedings are filed by teaching faculties in different Colleges affiliated to the Mahatma Gandhi University (for short M.G. University) and the litigation has a very long history.

(2.) It appears that in 1993 the School of Technology and Applied Science affiliated to the M.G. University issued advertisement for recruiting qualified Lecturers/Professors/Guest Lecturers for being appointed as Full time/Part Time on contract basis. Accordingly, large number of persons were employed. This continued for more than a decade. It appears that, on 03.09.2002, the Syndicate of the University, considering the long tenure and continuous service of three such recruited teachers namely Dr.Joji J. Anchanattu, Dr.S. Krishnakumar and Dr.Eldhose N.V. and having found that they were holding full UGC/AICTE qualifications, they were granted pay scale from 01.01.2002 and subsequently declared their probation with effect from 02.01.2003. Another person similarly situated, being contract Lecturer as well, namely Sri.Anilkumar P.V., citing the aforesaid precedent, moved this Court and succeeded. Consequently, considering that he also has UGC/AICTE qualification, University agreed to grant him pay scale from 01.01.2002 and declared his probation with effect from 02.01.2003. Then came Smt.Bijamma Thomas, who was granted the same benefit from the said date i.e. 01.01.2002 pursuant to orders of this Court and her probation was declared with effect from 02.01.2003. Though the scale of pay granted to some of the Lecturers were withdrawn by the University, the same was interfered by this Court and those Lecturers were held entitled for grant of benefits as that of similarly placed Lecturers. Though the University preferred appeal, the same was rejected by the Division Bench. Thus seen, as per the decision of the University, pursuant to orders of this Court which have all become final, all those five Lecturers/Professors/Guest Lecturers who were recruited on contractual basis and who satisfied the eligibility criteria set by the UGC/AICTE, were granted pay scale with effect from 01.01.2002 and probation was declared with effect from 02.01.2003.

(3.) Now, the petitioners herein are in two groups. One group consists of persons who were similarly recruited prior to 01.01.2002 and the other, who were recruited thereafter. The writ petitions were allowed with a direction to treat the petitioners similar to the 5 aforesaid persons. These decisions in the writ petitions have become final. When it came to implementation of the judgment, various contentions have been raised. Petitioners contend, as we have noted in our earlier orders, that deliberate obstacles have been placed by the University to avoid implementing the orders passed by this Court. Repeatedly the petitioners had to approach this Court. It seems that nothing is to be given without a fight is the motto of the University.