SUKSHETRA RANJAN DAS Vs. UTKAL UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who has been practising as an advocate in this High Court, was appointed provisionally as a part-time Lecturer in Law in the Madhusudan Law College at Cuttack under the Utkal University in Jan., 1980 for a term of three years after selection by a committee with the Vice-Chancellor of the University as its Chairman which had been approved and confirmed by the Syndicate of the University and he joined the Post in pursuance of the order of appointment dated Jan. 16, 1981, as per Annexure-1, While the petitioner was continuing as a provisional part-time Lecturer in Law, an advertisement was issued by the University inviting applications for appointment of seven part-time Lecturers in Law for the same college and in response to that, the petitioner, being qualified and eligible, made an application wherein it has been mentioned by him that he had been continuing as a provisional part-time Lecturer in the College. He was required to appear at an interview on Nov. 23, 1982 and he did appear and was selected. After his selection, which was approved by the Syndicate, the Registrar of the University (opposite party No. 2) issued an office order (Annexure-2) dated Dec. 7, 1982 to the petitioner, appointing him as a part-time Lecturer in Law for a period of three years and required him to join before Dec. 13, 1982. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner gave a joining report on Dec. 11, 1982 and he also submitted resignation on the same day from the provisional post he was holding. The petitioner was allowed to work as a Lecturer in Law after his selection and appointment as per Annexure-2 and while he was continuing as such, the opposite party No. 2 issued an order (Annexure-3) terminating his services with effect from Jan. 19, 1984, arbitrarily and in mala fide exercise of power, as averred in the writ application. The petitioner seeks the issuance of a writ quashing Annexure-3 and directing the University for his continuance in the post of the part-time Lecturer in Law by virtue of his appointment, as per Annexure-2, till Dec. 11, 1985, i. e., for the unexpired term of his appointment.

(2.) The stand of the University, as would appear from the return submitted by its Deputy Registrar, is that when the petitioner and three others gave joining reports, after the petitioner's appointment as per Annexure-2, the Vice-Chancellor of the University accepted the other three joining reports and did not accept the joining report of the petitioner. On June 29, 1983, a note was submitted that the petitioner would complete his second term as a part-time Lecturer in Law in Oct., 1983 and in case his joining report was accepted, his continuance would be for a third term. The Deputy Registrar of the University suggested that the appointment of the petitioner ought to be withdrawn and cancelled without accepting his letter of resignation from the provisional post. The matter was placed before the Syndicate which accepted the suggestion on Jan. 24, 1984 and it decided to terminate the services of the petitioner with effect from Jan. 19, 1984, as his joining report in the new post had not been accepted and the term of his provisional appointment had expired on Jan. 19, 1984.

(3.) At the hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the opposite party No. 2 have taken the same stand.