Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Supriya Habbu, was appointed as a temporary Lecturer in English at K.V. Pendharkar College of Arts, Science & Commerce (Respondent No.1) on 26th June, 1992, against a reserved post. The post was advertised on 10th April, 1992 as reserved, but no candidate from the reserved category was available. Consequently, the petitioner was appointed on a temporary basis. For the next six years, the post was regularly advertised, but each time no reserved category candidate was found. Despite this, the college did not initiate the de-reservation process as per the government policy and the University of Mumbai's circular dated 17th July, 1996. Instead, the college re-advertised the post for the seventh year on 14th June, 1997, and terminated the petitioner's services by letter dated 20th March, 1998, effective from 20th April, 1998. The petitioner, having completed the State Eligibility Test and becoming eligible for confirmation, challenged the termination before the Bombay High Court. The court observed that the college had failed to initiate de-reservation proceedings despite six years of unsuccessful advertisements. The court held that the college cannot continue to advertise the post indefinitely and must follow the de-reservation policy. The termination was set aside, and the college was directed to initiate the de-reservation process within two months. If the post is de-reserved, the petitioner is to be confirmed in the post. The petition was allowed in those terms.
Headnote
A) Service Law - De-reservation of Reserved Posts - Temporary Appointment - Petitioner appointed temporarily against reserved post for Lecturer in English - Post advertised for six years but no reserved candidate available - College failed to initiate de-reservation process as per government policy and University circular dated 17th July, 1996 - Held that the college cannot continue to advertise the post indefinitely and must initiate de-reservation process - Petitioner entitled to be considered for confirmation after de-reservation (Paras 1-3). B) Service Law - Termination of Temporary Employee - Validity - Petitioner's service terminated after seven years of temporary appointment - Termination held unjust as college did not follow de-reservation procedure - Held that termination is set aside and college directed to initiate de-reservation process and confirm petitioner if post is de-reserved (Paras 3-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner, appointed temporarily against a reserved post due to non-availability of reserved category candidates, is entitled to confirmation after six years of continuous service and failure of the college to initiate de-reservation process.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The impugned order of termination dated 20th March, 1998 is set aside. Respondent No.1 is directed to initiate the process of de-reservation of the post in accordance with the policy of the Government and the University circular dated 17th July, 1996 within two months from today. If the post is de-reserved, the petitioner shall be confirmed in the said post. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- De-reservation of reserved posts
- temporary appointment in reserved posts
- confirmation of temporary employees
- termination of temporary service
- policy of government and university circulars
