SMT. RAJANI GOEL Vs. SHREE GANDHI SHIKSHAN SAMITA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both the petitioners have filed this writ petition jointly challenging the order passed by the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions [Tribunal (in short 'the Tribunal') dated 07.09.1998 by which the appeals filed by the petitioners individually was decided by a common order whereby their appeals were rejected and the termination order passed by the respondent, was upheld.

(2.) The brief facts for disposal of the present petition are that the petitioners have stated that they were appointed initially on 01.07.1995 on temporary basis with the Gandhi Teacher's College, Gulabpura as Lecturers Economics. They were again appointed afresh on 31.05.1997. In both the appointment orders, the petitioners were shown as temporary Lecturer. However, the difference was that in the earlier appointment order, the salary was on fixed basis while in the subsequent order, the salary was in the pay scale. It is further case of the petitioners that by order dated 04.10.1997 the appointment order dated 31.05.1997 was limited only upto 06.10.1997 and there by another order of 06.10.1997, the services of the petitioners were dispensed with treating them on temporary basis for a period only upto 06.10.1997. It is a case of the petitioners that they were working on substantive basis and the provisions contained under the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Act of 1989 and the Rules framed therein were not followed. The conditions of section 18 of the Act as well as Rule 39 of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Rules of 1993 requiring prior approval as well as payment of six months pay in lieu of termination, were not followed. It is also their case that no enquiry was conducted before removing them from service.

(3.) The petitioners have further stated that when they filed the appeal before the Tribunal, it was specifically pointed out that persons had been appointed subsequent to the appointment of the petitioners but they had been retained as Lecturers in the faculty of Arts. Before this Court also, copy of the advertisement dated 30.05.1998 issued by the respondent subsequent to the petitioners termination has been placed, whereby the applications have been invited for appointment on the post of Lecturers Economics and thus, the termination of the petitioners was wholly unjustified, illegal and an act of hire and fire policy adopted by the respondent.