Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, an Associate Professor in Physics at Sardar Patel College of Engineering, applied for No-Objection to pursue a full-time PhD under the Quality Improvement Programme (QIP) as per Government Resolutions dated 20th November 1996 and 28th October 1998. The college granted No-Objection on 18th July 2019. However, based on a revised Government Resolution dated 24th February 2021 that did not provide for replacement of teachers pursuing PhD, the college withdrew the No-Objection on 30th December 2021. The petitioner challenged this withdrawal by way of a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The court examined the Government Resolutions and found that the initial No-Objection was validly granted under the 1996 Resolution, which permitted deputation. The 2021 Resolution did not expressly prohibit deputation but only omitted the provision for replacement. The court held that the withdrawal was arbitrary and violated the petitioner's legitimate expectation. The court allowed the petition, quashed the communication dated 30th December 2021, and directed the college to grant consent and relieve the petitioner for the PhD programme under QIP.
Headnote
A) Constitutional Law - Article 226 - Writ of Mandamus - Quality Improvement Programme - The petitioner, an Associate Professor, sought mandamus to compel the college to recall its decision refusing deputation for PhD under QIP. The court held that the college's withdrawal of No-Objection based on a revised Government Resolution was arbitrary and violative of legitimate expectation, as the petitioner had already been granted No-Objection and had applied for the programme. (Paras 1-9)
B) Service Law - Deputation - Quality Improvement Programme - Government Resolution dated 20th November 1996 - The court interpreted the Government Resolution to permit deputation for PhD under QIP, and the subsequent Government Resolution dated 24th February 2021 did not expressly prohibit such deputation. The court directed the college to grant consent and relieve the petitioner. (Paras 3-8)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the college's withdrawal of No-Objection for deputation under QIP based on revised Government Resolution is valid and whether the petitioner is entitled to relief under Article 226.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The communication dated 30th December 2021 is quashed and set aside. Respondent No. 2 is directed to grant consent for deputation and relieve the petitioner to pursue full-time PhD under QIP.
Law Points
- Article 226
- Quality Improvement Programme
- Government Resolution dated 20th November 1996
- Government Resolution dated 28th October 1998
- Government Resolution dated 24th February 2021
- legitimate expectation
- promissory estoppel
Case Details
2022 LawText (BOM) (02) 77
Writ Petition (L) No. 31705 of 2021
Sunil B. Shukre, Amit Borkar
Mr. Bernardo Reis, i/b Priyanka Pandit, for the Petitioner; Mr. Kedar Dighe, AGP, for the Respondent-State; Mr. Susheel Mahadeshwar, i/b Ranjana Todankar, for Respondent No. 2; Ms. Kavita Anchan, with Arsh Misra, i/b M.V. Kini, for the Respondent – IIT
State of Maharashtra, Sardar Patel College of Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Director of Technical Education
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Article 226 challenging withdrawal of No-Objection for deputation under QIP.
Remedy Sought
Writ of mandamus directing Respondent No. 2 to recall its decision refusing consent for deputation and to relieve the petitioner for PhD under QIP.
Filing Reason
Respondent No. 2 withdrew the No-Objection granted to the petitioner for pursuing PhD under QIP based on a revised Government Resolution.
Previous Decisions
Respondent No. 2 granted No-Objection on 18th July 2019, but later withdrew it on 30th December 2021.
Issues
Whether the withdrawal of No-Objection by the college based on revised Government Resolution is valid.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to relief under Article 226.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the initial No-Objection was validly granted under the 1996 Government Resolution and the 2021 Resolution did not prohibit deputation.
Respondent No. 2 argued that the 2021 Resolution did not provide for replacement, hence the No-Objection was withdrawn.
Ratio Decidendi
The withdrawal of No-Objection based on a revised Government Resolution that did not expressly prohibit deputation was arbitrary and violative of the petitioner's legitimate expectation. The initial No-Objection granted under the 1996 Resolution remained valid.
Judgment Excerpts
By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, a Associate Professor working with Respondent No. 2 – Sardar Patel College of Engineering seeks a writ of mandamus commanding the Respondent No.2 to recall its decision refusing to grant consent for deputation of the Petitioner with Respondent No. 3 and relieve the Petitioner to pursue full-time PhD programme under Quality Improvement Programme.
Respondent No. 2, therefore, by communication dated 30th December 2021, withdrawn No Objection granted in favour of the Petitioner for pursuing PhD.
Procedural History
The petitioner applied for No-Objection on 18th July 2019, which was granted. On 24th February 2021, a revised Government Resolution was issued. On 30th December 2021, the college withdrew the No-Objection. The petitioner filed the writ petition on an unspecified date, and the court reserved judgment on 21st February 2022 and pronounced on 24th February 2022.
Acts & Sections
- Constitution of India: Article 226
