Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Dr. Mrs. Shamim Momin, was appointed as a Lecturer in Oils, Fats and Waxes at the University Institute of Chemical Technology, University of Mumbai, vide letter dated 12th January, 1987. She continuously held the post. The University forwarded a proposal to the State Government for de-reservation of the post, which was rejected by order dated 1st February, 2003. Apprehending termination of her services, the petitioner approached the Bombay High Court by way of Writ Petition No.3102 of 2004. The petitioner raised contentions similar to those in Writ Petition No.3101 of 2004. Notably, an advertisement issued on 14th August, 1999 specifically stated that if a candidate for the reserved post was not available, the post would be interchangeable. The court found that the substantial compliance in this case was much more than in the companion petition. Consequently, the court allowed the petition and directed Respondent No.2 (University Institute of Chemical Technology) to regularise the petitioner in the post with effect from 4th January, 1992.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Regularisation - De-reservation of Posts - Petitioner appointed as Lecturer in reserved post in 1987 - University's proposal for de-reservation rejected - Court held that substantial compliance with reservation policy was met as advertisement provided for interchangeability - Directions issued to regularise petitioner from 4th January, 1992 (Paras 2-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, appointed as a Lecturer in a reserved post, is entitled to regularisation despite rejection of de-reservation proposal.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. Respondent No.2 is directed to regularise the petitioner in the post with effect from 4th January, 1992.
Law Points
- Regularisation of ad hoc employees
- De-reservation of posts
- Substantial compliance with reservation policy
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (04) 240
Writ Petition No.3102 of 2004
F.I. Rebello, S.P. Kukday
Mr. C.U. Singh with Ms. M. D'Souza i/b. M/s. Sanjay Udeshi & Co. for Petitioner, Mr. Rui A Rodrigues with Mr. B.V. Phadnis for Respondent No.1 & 2, Mr. M.D. Naik, A.G.P. for Respondent No.4, Mr. Kiran J. Khanpile for Respondent No.5
University of Mumbai, University Institute of Chemical Technology, University Grants Commission, State of Maharashtra, Union of India
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition seeking regularisation of service and protection from termination.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought regularisation in the post of Lecturer and protection from termination of services.
Filing Reason
Petitioner apprehended termination of her services after the State Government rejected the University's proposal for de-reservation of her post.
Previous Decisions
The proposal for de-reservation was rejected by order dated 1st February, 2003. A similar petition (Writ Petition No.3101 of 2004) was disposed of with similar reasons.
Issues
Whether the petitioner is entitled to regularisation despite rejection of de-reservation proposal.
Whether there was substantial compliance with reservation policy.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the advertisement dated 14th August, 1999 provided for interchangeability of reserved post, showing substantial compliance.
Respondents opposed regularisation citing rejection of de-reservation proposal.
Ratio Decidendi
Where an advertisement for a reserved post provides for interchangeability if a candidate from the reserved category is not available, there is substantial compliance with reservation policy, and the appointee is entitled to regularisation.
Judgment Excerpts
In the light of that the Petition will have to be allowed and directions will have to go to Respondent No.2 to regularise the Petitioner for the post with effect from 4th January, 1992.
Procedural History
Petitioner appointed as Lecturer on 12th January, 1987. University proposed de-reservation, rejected on 1st February, 2003. Petitioner filed Writ Petition No.3102 of 2004 before Bombay High Court. Heard and disposed on 26th April, 2005.
