ASHA SANGRAM RANE SMT Vs. SHIVAJI UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against an order of the Industrial Court, Kolhapur, dated April 17, 1989, made in Complaint (ULP) No. 105 of 1988 under Section 28 read with Items 5, 6, 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of the Maharashtra recognition of Trade Unions and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' ).

(2.) THE First Respondent is a University set up i under the Shivaji University Act, 1974, the second Respondent the Registrar of the said University, the Third Respondent is a Member of the Industrial Court, Kolhapur, and the Fourth Respondent is the State of Maharashtra. The petitioner is a Master of Arts and Bachelor of Library Science. She was appointed as Senior library Assistant in the first Respondent University with effect from August 18, 1978 on daily wages of Rs. 10/- (Rupees ten only ). Though her appointment was stated to be for a period of four months from August 18, 1978 to December 14, 1978 on December 15, 1978 her initial appointment was extended for a further period of four months and on April 18, 1979 the appointment of the Petitioner was extended until further notice. On May 27, 1980 the Petitioner's service as Senior Library Assistant was terminated. Thereafter, the Petitioner was employed during every academic year for about 11 months from July or August. Those appointments were said to be temporary and on daily wages at different rates from year to year. Sometime in 1980 the First Respondent advertised for filling up the vacancies of six posts of Library Assistants. Out of the said six posts, two posts of Senior Library Assistants were to be filled by making permanent Library Assistants on daily wages who were working on the same basis as the petitioner, while four other posts were to be filled by recruiting fresh candidates after following the prescribed procedure. Initially, there were in all six Library Assistants including the petitioner working on daily wages. Out of the six, two were made permanent, two left services and the Petitioner and one Ms. Suryawanshi remained as Library Assistant on daily wages. Between them, the Petitioner was Senior. Although there were originally 12 permanent posts of library Assistants one post lapsed in the year 1982 because the First Respondent did not fill it up as required and the sanction to that post lapsed. Thus, from the year 1982, there are only 11 permanent posts of Library Assistants, which have been sanctioned.

(3.) ON March 11, 1988 the First Respondent advertised two posts of Senior Library Assistants and invited applications for filling the same. One of the posts was reserved for a scheduled caste candidate. Both the Petitioner and Ms. Suryawanshi applied for the open category post of Senior library Assistant. Both the Petitioner and Ms. Suryawanshi had identical qualifications and had joined the First Respondent as Senior Library Assistants on daily wages at about the same time. Ms. Suryawanshi was selected and appointed to the post.