DHARM NATH SINGH Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was initially appointed as lecturer in sociology in the university under the order of the Vice Chancellor dated 11th March,1980 on a consolidated pay of Rs. 500/ - per month for a period of three months. Although the appointment was made for a period of three months but the same was continued till 31st July, 1983. In the session 1979 -80 the university made an advertisement for the selection of lecturer in sociology. The petitioner applied in pursuance to the advertisement and appeared before the selection committee on 13th April, 1981. Selection committee selected three other persons on 26th September, 1982. The name of the petitioner was placed under serial No. 4 with the recommendation that in any case vacancy found, the petitioner may be given appointment. However, no such situation arose. Again on 26th September, 1982 another advertisement was made to fill up the post of temporary lecturer in Economics, Sociology, English, Hindi, Philosophy and History. Again selection was made on 31st July, 1983 and the petitioner was placed under serial No. 2. One Dr. Girja Prasad Dubey, who was the second empanelled candidate in the earlier selection now become first and appointment was given accordingly. The petitioner was given appointment in the post of temporary lecturer in the evening classes of the Institution. The appointment letter was given on 31st July, 1983. However, on 30th June, 1987 the university decided not to continue the evening classes and accordingly a decision was taken. However, the petitioner was retained to continue till 30th June, 1988. The service of the rest of the teachers were terminated.

(2.) THE petitioner was again appointed on 6th August, 1988 to continue upto 31st August, 1988. In further he was appointed on 9th August, 1988 and was asked to continue. The petitioner continued till March, 1989. On 5th February, 1990, the petitioner was given an adjustment against the leave vacancy caused due to the long leave of Dr. N.S. Deshpandey. On 21st March, 1991 the petitioner was again appointed which was continued till 31st March, 1991. On 30th May, 1991 in a writ petition filed by the petitioner, a direction was given by the Court upon the authorities in case further appointment for the post in question is to be made, the petitioner's case also be considered by the appropriate respondents giving preference to his seniority and suitability. Petitioner contended that one Dr. R.P. Singh was similarly placed who, filed a writ petition and obtained an order under which the Executive Council of the University was directed to consider the case having requisite qualifications. According to the petitioner, on 18th January, 1990 the petitioner was appointed with regular pay scale against the leave vacancy caused due to long leave of Sri Sohan Ram Yadav which was extended and on 20th April, 1993, the petitioner was finally absorbed as a lecturer against the vacancy occurred due to promotion of one Dr. Shyamdhar Singh. It was further contended that pursuant to the judgment of Supreme Court in connection with regularization of service of the teachers appointed for the evening classes, a committee was constituted under the Chairmanship of Justice A.N. Verma and decided to regularize the services of the teachers in various departments working in the temporary capacity for the evening classes.

(3.) THE contesting respondent contended that there were four breaks in the service of the petitioner till 31st July, 1983 for several days. The University on its own started the evening classes for the session 1979 -80 on the basis of 'no profit no loss'. No post was sanctioned by the State Government for teaching in the evening classes. The petitioner was teaching in the evening classes. The appointment of the petitioner in 1981 was made neither against any sanctioned post nor approved nor any financial sanction was given by the State Government. The petitioner worked continuously in the University. In fact vide advertisement No. 2/1983 one sanctioned post arose in the sociology department and against the same Dr. Girja Prasad Dubey was given appointment after approval of the Executive Council. His appointment was made against the sanctioned vacant post in the evening classes. The petitioner was given appointment on a fixed honorarium of Rs. 1000/ - vide order dated 31st July, 1983. Since no sanctioned post was there, the University decided to discontinue the evening classes. One month's notice was given to the teachers, lecturers and their services were abolished w.e.f. 31st July, 1987. It appears that teachers were, in fact, appointed on consolidated honorarium. Petitioner's service was terminated on 15th November, 1988. He was engaged to complete the course of final year students in the evening classes at the rate of Rs. 20/ - per lecture. His appointment was not continued till March, 1989. The order dated 5th February, 1990 was cancelled by the order dated 7th February, 1990. The appointment of the petitioner dated 21st March, 1991 continued till 31st May, 1991. Again after a gap of more than one month, the petitioner was appointed till the end of the examination and his appointment was cancelled on 15th November, 1991 w.e.f. 31st October, 1991. The petitioner was ultimately absorbed as lecturer in sociology department against a clear vacant post in absence of any other candidate. He was granted senior scale and in the career advancement scheme the petitioner was granted the scale of Reader. It is stated that the date of absorption of the petitioner is 18th January, 1992. The petitioner was given approval for the final absorption as per Clause 15.05 of the Statute of the University. Petitioner never challenged the list published on 14th May, 2002 nor he challenged the date of his absorption. Petitioner is not entitled to continue and length of service as has been given to Dr. R.P. Singh. In view of the order of the Supreme Court and the report submitted by Hon'ble Justice A.N. Verma, the service of the Dr. R.P. Singh for absorption was denied. Thus Dr. R.P. Singh has filed a writ petition in which the Hon'ble Court was pleased to pass an order dated 2nd February 1994 directing the University to absorb Dr. R.P. Singh from the date when he was terminated. Such order was passed following the order dated 6th October 1999 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 35520 of 1996 Dr. Satya Narain Singh v. Mahatma Gandhi Kashi Vidya Peeth, Varanasi and Ors. However, this Hon'ble court was pleased to say that Dr. R.P. Singh would not be entitled for the salary of the period except for the last three months period and the period between 1987 to November 1993 shall be treated as leave without pay. Petitioner did not challenge the order passed in appeal before the Chancellor therefore he cannot get relief in connection thereto.