GUNEETA CHANDHA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is confined to sixteen petitioners other than petitioners No. 12 and 15, who have since resigned from their job as Lecturer.

(2.) PRIOR to the reorganisation of the State of Punjab on November 1, 1966, the post of Lecturer in all the Colleges in the erstwhile State of Punjab was class III post and the appointment/recruitment to the said post was governed by the statutory rules known as Punjab Subordinate Education Service Rules, 1937 (hereinafter called 'the 1937 Rules'). The Lecturer being a class III post did not fall within the purview of the Punjab Public Service Commission. On reorganisation of the State of Punjab on November 1, 1966, and on the formation of the U.T. Chandigarh, 1937 Rules continued to remain in force and operation in the U.T. Chandigarh by virtue of the provisions of Section 88 of the Punjab Reorganisation Act, 1966. Appointments were made in U.T. Chandigarh against the posts of Lecturer under the 1937 Rules on regular basis by treating the post of Lecturer as class III post. The appointments under the 1937 Rules were made after the same were notified to the Employment Exchange and/or advertisement in the newspapers. The selection was made by a selection committee constituted under the 1937 Rules consisting of Education Secretary, D.P.I. (Colleges), Experts in the subject and the Principal of the College concerned.

(3.) SOME Lecturers who had been appointed in UT Chandigarh during the period 1985 and 1986 filed Writ Petition (Civil) No. 368 of 1987 directly in the Supreme Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. The same was titled as Dr. Gagan Inder Kaur and others v. U.T. Chandigarh and others. Dr. Gagan Inder Kaur and others claimed that though their appointments had been described as ad hoc appointments, yet they were entitled to be treated as regular Lecturers in the College cadre w.e.f. the date they were recruited and appointed. The writ petition was allowed by the Apex Court on October 17, 1995. Copy of the judgment has been appended as Annexure P -1 with the written -statement of the U.T. Before making reference to the judgment of the Apex Court in Dr. Gagan Inder Kaur's case, it may be observed here that on February 21, 1991, the Chandigarh Administration published in the gazette a notification dated September 14, 1990, notifying Rules whereby the Chandigarh Administration for the first time declared the post of Lecturer to be class II post with retrospective effect from April 1, 1975. These rules are known as Chandigarh Educational Service (Group 'B' Gaz.) Government Arts and Science College Rules, 1990 (hereinafter called 1990 Rules). Apart from conferring class II status to the post of Lecturer w.e.f. April 1, 1975, the mode of recruitment and qualifications were given in Rule 4 of the 1990 Rules. After making the 1990 Rules and prior to their publication in the Gazette, a letter dated January 9, 1991, was addressed by the Education Secretary, Chandigarh Administration, to UPSC wherein after referring to the rules it was stated as under : -