Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Mahadeorao Ramchandra Khadatkar, was appointed as a lecturer in economics at Dr. Punjabrao Deshmukh Arts and Commerce (Evening) College, Nagpur, run by respondent No.1-Society, with effect from 01.08.1988. His services were terminated by order dated 01.02.1992 with effect from 03.02.1992. The appellant challenged the termination before the College Tribunal, Aurangabad, in Appeal No.N-3/1992. The Tribunal allowed the appeal on 28.06.1995, setting aside the termination and ordering reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages. Respondent Nos.1 and 2 (the Society and the College) challenged the Tribunal's order by filing Writ Petition No.3119/1995 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. A learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition on 27/30.04.2012 and 04.05.2012, setting aside the Tribunal's order. The appellant then filed the present Letters Patent Appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent. The main legal issues were whether the termination was valid without prior approval of the University and the Education Officer, and whether the Tribunal's order of reinstatement with back wages was correct. The appellant argued that the termination was illegal as it was passed without following the mandatory procedure under the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994, which requires prior approval of the University and the Education Officer. The respondents contended that the appellant was not a permanent employee and that the termination was justified. The Division Bench of the High Court, after hearing both sides, held that the termination was indeed illegal as it was made without obtaining the necessary approvals. The court found that the Tribunal had correctly set aside the termination and ordered reinstatement with full back wages. The court also held that the Letters Patent Appeal was maintainable. Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, the judgment of the Single Judge was set aside, and the order of the College Tribunal was restored. The appellant was directed to be reinstated with continuity of service and full back wages.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination - Approval of University and Education Officer - Sections 82, 83, 85 Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 - Termination of a lecturer without prior approval of the University and the Education Officer is illegal and void - The College Tribunal has jurisdiction to set aside such termination and order reinstatement with full back wages - Held that the termination order dated 01.02.1992 was invalid as it was passed without obtaining necessary approvals (Paras 1-10). B) Letters Patent Appeal - Maintainability - Clause 15 Letters Patent - An appeal lies against the judgment of a Single Judge in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India - The appeal is maintainable as the Single Judge's judgment set aside the Tribunal's order - Held that the Letters Patent Appeal is competent (Paras 1-2). C) Service Law - Reinstatement - Back Wages - Full back wages - When termination is set aside as illegal, the employee is entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages - The Tribunal's order granting such relief was upheld - Held that the appellant is entitled to all consequential benefits (Paras 28-29).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the termination of the appellant's services without prior approval of the University and the Education Officer was valid, and whether the College Tribunal's order of reinstatement with back wages was correct.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Judgment of Single Judge set aside. Order of College Tribunal dated 28.06.1995 restored. Appellant entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages.
Law Points
- Termination of service without approval of University and Education Officer is illegal
- Reinstatement with full back wages is proper remedy
- College Tribunal has jurisdiction to entertain appeal against termination
- Letters Patent Appeal lies against judgment of Single Judge in writ petition under Article 226
