JANARDAN PRASAD SINGH Vs. UNION GOVERNMENT OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) I .A. No. 3602/08 has been filed challenging the order of the respondent University dated 21.6.2008 annulling the extension granted to the petitioner by order dated 31.5.2008 on the post of Additional Director of the Population Research Centre, Patna University. The original relief sought was for quashing the proposal for fresh advertisement and not to make appointment afresh on the post of Additional Director. The Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India established a network of Population Research Centres (P.R.Cs.) to carry out research and studies on various social and economic aspects of Health and Family Welfare Programs. These are primarily located in Universities. They function as a plan scheme of the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India and which provides 100% funds for meeting the salary, allowances, research and studies, infrastructure etc. and recruitment expenditure on persons appointed thereunder. The funds are paid by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India to the University which only looks after the administrative matters of the Population Research Centres.

(3.) AN advertisement for appointment on the post of Additional Director was accordingly issued in response to which the petitioner, who was holding the substantive post as a University Professor of Sociology in the Patna University, applied. He came to be selected. His letter of appointment dated 7.6.2004 simply states that he was required to join within 15 days. If the vacancy was substantive, in absence of any other recital in the letter of appointment, it is presumed to be a substantive appointment. If that be so, the post of the petitioner as a Professor of Sociology gets jeopardized. In these circumstances more than three years after his appointment in a substantive capacity a letter was issued by the University purporting to modify his substantive appointment into one of deputationist from 7.6.2004 to 6.6.2008. Quite obviously, it suited the petitioner not to challenge this change of his status from his substantive status as Additional Director to that of a deputationist because otherwise he stood to risk to the status of a University Professor of Sociology. The petitioner was consciously traveling in two boats.