PREETI SHARATCHANDRA SHIRODKAR Vs. UNIVERSITY OF MUMBAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Petitioner is a Lecturer in English working in the second Respondent college affiliated to the first Respondent University. It is her case that she was first selected on 17th August 1992 by duly constituted University Selection Committee. She has obtained Masters Degree in English Literature with first class from University of Bombay. After her initial selection which was against a reserved post, advertisement have been given by the college continuously every year until the last advertisement of 3rd August 1998. It is her case that during this period seven times the post was advertised and though her post was meant for reserved category candidate, no candidate from those categories become available. A candidate became available ultimately in pursuance of the advertisement dated 3rd August 1998. That time she feared that she will be dislodged by the person concerned i.e. Respondent No. 4 herein and therefore filed present petition.

(2.) IN this petition she contended that advertisements for this post have been issued or the necessary number of times and yet a qualified person from the reserved category has not been found. Therefore, the Respondents ought to be directed to begin the process of dereservation of the post of Lecturer in English in Respondent no. 2 college and at the end of that procedure, the Petitioner ought to be confirmed from her initial late of appointment. The Petition was admired by Division Bench on 7th January 2002 and an interim relief granted earlier was confirmed whereby respondents are restrained from terminating services of Petitioner as Lecturer in English. She has been continued since then with all benefits such as increments and deductions for the purposes of Provident Fund etc.

(3.) IT is further submitted in para no. 4 of this reply that although the process for dereservation may begin, the Petitioner cannot be automatically absorbed in the dereserved post. It is submitted that when a post is dereserved, it is first to be filled by absorption of surplus teachers available in the subjects in the list maintained at regional as well as state level. It is only when no such surplus teacher is available that the post will be filled. But it will be now filled by nomination from open competition. It is only if the Petitioner gets selected in that process that she can claim the post. It is further submitted that she has not cleared NET/SET and therefore, she is not qualified for appointment. Mr. Desai does not dispute that the Petitioner has not cleared that necessary examinations. However, he submits in this behalf that under a Division Bench judgment, those who have been appointed prior to 2001 are not required to clear these examinations. The judgment is rendered in the case of Writ Petition No. 5782 of 2001 and companion petitions decided on 18th April 2003 (Coram : V.G. Palshikar & Smt. Nishita Mhatre, JJ).