KAKOLI SHYAMLAL SIRCER Vs. NAGPUR UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition, the petitioner is seeking an appropriate writ, order and direction directing that the Order dated 27-9-1988 issued by the respondent No. 1 be quashed and set aside and that the petitioner may be declared to be appointed and the services of the petitioner as lecturer in Biochemistry may be confirmed from the date of her initial appointment by holding that the said post stood de-reserved.

(2.) FACTS: the petitioner was selected by the Selection Committee which was duly appointed and her selection was approved by the Nagpur University and she was appointed as a lecturer in the respondent college to teach a subject of Biochemistry w. e. f. 2-9-1985. The said appointment was made for the period of one year. The approval which was given by the University was also for a period of one year. The letter of appointment does not state that her appointment was made against the reserved category post. However, the approval which was granted to the said appointment states that the said post would be re-advertised again as reserved category post reserved for Scheduled Caste category for the next academic year. Accordingly, the petitioner again applied for the same post for the next year and since no candidate from the reserved category was available, the petitioner was continued in the said post and the approval was also granted for the period of one year by an Order dated 12-9-1986. The petitioner again worked for a period of one year i. e. for the academic year 1986-87. Thereafter the post was again advertised on 29-7-1987 for the scheduled caste candidate and again no scheduled caste candidate was available and, therefore, the petitioner was appointed as a lecturer to teach the subject of Biochemistry for the academic session 1987-88 and the said selection was approved by the University by its Order dated 11-11-1987 and after approval, the services of the petitioner were continued as a full time lecturer in subject of Biochemistry.

(3.) IN the following year i. e. academic year 1988-89 again the post was advertised for the subject of Biochemistry for scheduled caste candidate on 10-3-1988. Pursuant to the said advertisement, only one candidate applied for the said post and appeared before the duly constituted committee. Out of the six members of the selection committee, one member was absent. The remaining five members which included the nominee of Vice Chancellor, made an unanimous recommendation that the candidate did not understand the subject and, therefore, found that she was not suitable to teach the subject in Senior College and since no suitable candidate was available, the petitioner was appointed and continued in the said post due to non availability of the schedule caste candidate. The Principal of the college applied for approval by his letter dated 3-8-1988 and gave the particulars regarding advertisement. He mentioned that the post was advertised for the third time for the subject of Biochemistry reserved for scheduled caste and it was specifically mentioned in his application that since the petitioner is working for about 3 years, the said post may be approved for the season (sic Sessions) of 1988-89 and onwards and accordingly the post should be de-reserved and the services of the petitioner should be confirmed as per the Government Resolution No. USG 1286/1179/university-4 dated 29-9-1986. At this stage, it is pertinent to note that the Government Resolution dated 29-9-1986 it is categorically mentioned that if a person from the reserved category is not available, then a person from the open category should be appointed and if in the second and third year, a person from the reserved category is not available, then the person from the open category who has been appointed in the first year, should be continued without holding any interview and the post should be de-reserved and the said person from the open category should be confirmed in the said post. Further direction was given by the Government to the University to issue an Ordinance through Vice Chancellor by exercising his power under section 11 (6) (b) of the said Act.