LALIT KUMAR Vs. REGIONAL ENGINEERING COLLEGE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The questions involved in these two writ petitions are almost identical and both can conveniently be disposed of by a common judgment In both the writ petitions, the petitioners have sought a direction against respondents No. 1 to 3 for sponsoring their names for admission to M. Tech. programme 1990 -91 in their concerned subjects under quality improvement programme (briefly the Q.I.P.I of the Department of Education, Ministry of Human Resources and Development, at 111, New Delhi, on the ground that respondents No. 1 to 3 by their act and conduct had held out a promise to them that whenever they would get an opportunity to improve their qualification within five years of their joining the College, they would be sponsored for the course in question and as the petitioners had in pursuance of the said promise applied and since their applications had been duly forwarded by respondent No. 2, the respondents are now estopped from withholding the sponsorship and they are further estopped from imposing a condition on the petitioners of putting at least three years service before their names are sponsored for the course.

(2.) Petitioner Lalit Kumar in Civil Writ Petition No. 420 of 1990, was offered a temporary post of Lecturer in Computer Science and Engineering in the Regional Engineering College, Hamirpur, on the terms and conditions mentioned in the appointment letter dated December 16, 1988 (Annexure P -I). The petitioner joined his duties in the College on January 2, 1989. One of the conditions, namely condition No. 12 (a), mentioned in the appointment letter was to the following effect: - - "He should obtain Masters Degree in appropriate branch of Engg. Technology within a period of five years failing which his services shall be terminated.

(3.) Applications for admission to Master Degree programme under Q.I P. were invited by the All India Council for Technical Education and the last date for submission of the applications was November 13, 1989. On November 4, 1989, petitioner Lalit Kumar, submitted his application to respondent No. 2 for onward transmission to the concerned Institute. The application was forwarded by respondent No. 2 to the Principal Coordinator (Q. I. P.), Indian nstitute of Technology, Kharagpur, on November 7, 1989, alongwith a covering letter {Annexure RA) and a copy of the same was endorsed to the petitioner with the following remarks : "................It is made clear to him that in the event of his selection, the question of his relieving will be dependent on the various administrative/academic circumstances prevailing at the time since this is a new institution and facing many teaching troubles. Mere forwarding of the application should not be treated as final approval of this Institution -