UNIVERSITY OF PUNE Vs. MAHADEO SAHEBRAO JADHAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal arises from the Judgment and Order dated 9-10-2003, passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No.7330 of 2002. By the impugned Judgment, the learned single Judge has set aside the order dated 4-12-2002, passed by the University Tribunal and consequently has also set aside the order of termination of services of the respondent which was passed by the appellant-University on 3-9-2002.

(2.) The facts relevant for the decision are that the respondent joined the appellant-University as an Internal Auditor with effect from 20-6-1996. An advertisement came to be issued on 6-5-1997 inviting applications for the post of Finance and Accounts Officer in the appellant-University. Pursuant to the application of the respondent and after having undergone the selection process and on nomination by the Selection Committee, he was appointed as the Finance and Accounts Officer under the appellant under the letter dated 30-7-1997. The respondent accepted the said appointment under his letter dated 1-8-1997 and joined the services. Initially, the appointment was on probation and subsequently the respondent was confirmed in the said post on 1-8-1999. By an ordinance dated 12-5-2000, the Government of Maharashtra sought to amend the provisions of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994, hereinafter called as "the said Act". By virtue of the amendment, Section 20(1)(c) was introduced in the said Act whereby the post of Finance and Accounts Officer in all Non-Agricultural Universities in Maharashtra was converted into a tenure post, fixing the tenure to be of five years. The said amendment ordinance was subsequently approved by the Maharashtra State Legislative Assembly and by virtue of Act No.LV of 2000, the said amendment was incorporated in the said Act under the Amendment Act No.LV of 2000. Consequent to the said amendment, apprehending termination of his services by the appellant, a suit came to be filed by the respondent in the civil Court at Pune on 31-7-2002. Initially, the civil Court directed the maintenance of status quo in respect of the respondent s continuation in the said post. The appellant-University challenged the jurisdiction of the civil Court by filing an application under Section 9-A of the Code of Civil Procedure on 1-8-2002. The civil Court held that it had jurisdiction to entertain and try the suit by its order dated 7-8-2002. The matter was carried in revision application by the University and by the order dated 18-10-2002, the respondent was permitted to withdraw the civil suit with liberty to prosecute the appeal already filed by him before the University Tribunal. Obviously therefore, after withdrawal of the said suit, the matter proceeded before the University Tribunal. In fact, the matter before the University Tribunal was against the order dated 3-9-2002 as the said order came to be issued by the appellant terminating the services of the respondent pursuant to the ad-interim relief granted by this Court in civil revision application which was filed by the appellant against the order of the civil Court on the point of jurisdiction of the civil Court to deal with the matter. The appeal filed before the University Tribunal came to be dismissed by the order dated 4-12-2002. Thereafter, the matter was carried in Writ Petition No.7330 of 2002 wherein the impugned order was passed on 9-10-2003.

(3.) Before going to the merits of the case, it is necessary to deal with the preliminary objection sought to be raised on behalf of the respondent by filing Civil Application No.139 of 2005. It is the contention on behalf of the respondent that the L.P.A. having been filed by the Registrar of the University, the same is not maintainable in the sense that the Registrar has no authority to file such an appeal on behalf of the University. In that regard, attention is drawn to Section 17(6) and (7) of the said Act. On the other hand, it is sought to be contended on behalf of the appellant that the Registrar has been duly empowered by the Vice-Chancellor of the University and the appeal has been filed pursuant to the said direction by the Vice-Chancellor.