Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mrs. Beena Ninand Patil, was employed as a Lecturer in Physics at Vidyavardhini E.S. Andrades College of Science since 8th July 1991. The respondent No.1 college forwarded a proposal for de-reservation of her post to respondent No.3 (University of Bombay). The State Government rejected the de-reservation proposal by letter dated 9th March 2000. The petitioner had been serving for more than fourteen years. The issue involved was similar to that in Writ Petition No.1914 of 1999, decided on 13th April 2005. The court noted that in that decision, it was held that the State Government has power to relax the condition of advertisement and a teacher already holding the post in terms of University resolution can be regularised. The petitioner's counsel produced an advertisement showing an interchangeability clause on the sixth occasion. The court found no reason to subject the petitioner, who had worked for nearly fourteen years, to a fresh advertisement. Considering that all formalities had been complied with, the court directed respondent No.1 to issue a letter of appointment to the petitioner and forward the proposal for regularisation to the University and the State Government for approval.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Regularisation - De-reservation of Posts - Power of State Government to Relax Advertisement Condition - Petitioner employed as Lecturer in Physics since 1991 - Proposal for de-reservation rejected by State Government - Court held that State Government has power to relax condition of advertisement and teacher already holding post can be regularised - Considering petitioner's long service of fourteen years, court directed respondent No.1 to issue appointment letter and forward proposal for regularisation (Paras 1-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, who has worked for nearly fourteen years, should be subjected to a fresh advertisement for regularisation of her post, given the State Government's power to relax the condition of advertisement.
Final Decision
The court directed respondent No.1 to issue a letter of appointment to the petitioner and forward the proposal for regularisation to the University and the State Government for approval. The petition was disposed of in terms of the decision in Writ Petition No.1914 of 1999.
Law Points
- Regularisation of teachers
- De-reservation of posts
- Power of State Government to relax advertisement condition
- Interchangeability clause
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (04) 231
Writ Petition No.1889 of 1999
F.I. Rebello, S.P. Kukday
Ms. S.V. Deshpande for Petitioner, Mrs. S.S. Bhende, A.G.P. for Respondent No.4, Mr. J.M. Chandankar for Respondent No.1, Mr. R.A. Rodrigues with Mr. B.V. Phadnis for Respondent No.3
The Principal, Vidyavardhini Annasaheb Vartak College of Arts, Kedarnath Malhotra College of Commerce, E.S. Andrades College of Science; The Secretary, Vidyavardhini; University of Bombay; The State of Maharashtra
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition seeking regularisation of employment as Lecturer in Physics.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought direction to respondent No.1 to issue appointment letter and forward proposal for regularisation to University and State Government.
Filing Reason
Petitioner's post was reserved and de-reservation proposal was rejected by State Government, leading to uncertainty about her employment status.
Previous Decisions
Writ Petition No.1914 of 1999 decided on 13th April 2005, which held that State Government has power to relax advertisement condition and regularise teachers.
Issues
Whether the petitioner, who has worked for nearly fourteen years, should be subjected to a fresh advertisement for regularisation of her post.
Whether the State Government has power to relax the condition of advertisement for regularisation of teachers.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner's counsel argued that the advertisement on the sixth occasion showed an interchangeability clause, and that the petitioner had served for more than fourteen years.
Respondent No.3 (University) filed an affidavit stating that the State Government rejected the de-reservation proposal by letter dated 9th March 2000.
Ratio Decidendi
The State Government has power to relax the condition of advertisement, and a teacher already holding the post in terms of University resolution can be regularised on the said post. Considering the petitioner's long service of fourteen years, it would be unjust to subject her to a fresh advertisement.
Judgment Excerpts
Considering the said decision there is power in the State Government to relax the condition of advertisement and the teacher already holding the post in terms of University resolution can be regularised on the said post.
We see no reason as to why the Petitioner who has worked for nearly fourteen years be now subjected to a fresh advertisement.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Writ Petition No.1889 of 1999 seeking regularisation. The respondent No.1 had forwarded a de-reservation proposal to the University, which was rejected by the State Government on 9th March 2000. The court heard the matter and disposed it on 13th April 2005, following the decision in Writ Petition No.1914 of 1999.
