Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Kalyan Citizens' Education Society and Birla College of Arts, Science & Commerce, challenged an order dated 22-10-1992 passed by the College Tribunal in Appeal No.28 of 1991. The Tribunal had set aside the termination of the respondent, Smt. Pushpavati Wakode, who was appointed as a Lecturer on probation for 24 months from 17-7-1990. Her services were terminated with effect from 21-4-1991 by an order-cum-notice dated 14-3-1991. The respondent appealed, and the Tribunal allowed the appeal, directing reinstatement with full back wages and consequential benefits. The petitioners argued that the Tribunal ignored documents showing compliance with Statute 418(2) of the Bombay University Statutes, which requires a resolution by the Governing Body for termination. They contended that the decision was taken by the Governing Body and communicated under the signatures of the Chairman and Principal. The High Court, after hearing both sides, found that the petitioners failed to produce any resolution of the Governing Body authorizing the termination. The Court noted that the order of termination was signed by the Chairman and Principal but did not reflect a decision by the Governing Body. Therefore, the Tribunal's finding of non-compliance with Statute 418(2) was correct. The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Tribunal's order of reinstatement with full back wages.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Probation Termination - Compliance with Statute 418(2) - Bombay University Statutes - The issue was whether the termination of a probationary lecturer was valid when the order was signed by the Chairman and Principal but not supported by a resolution of the Governing Body as required by Statute 418(2). The College Tribunal set aside the termination and ordered reinstatement with full back wages. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's order, holding that the management failed to prove compliance with the statute. (Paras 1-3)
B) Service Law - Reinstatement with Back Wages - Discretion of Tribunal - The Tribunal's order of reinstatement with full back wages was not interfered with as the termination was found to be invalid. (Para 3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the termination of the respondent's services as a probationary lecturer was valid and in compliance with Statute 418(2) of the Bombay University Statutes.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the College Tribunal's order dated 22-10-1992 which set aside the termination of the respondent and directed reinstatement with full back wages and consequential benefits.
Law Points
- Probation termination
- Compliance with university statutes
- Governing body resolution
- Reinstatement with back wages
Case Details
2006 LawText (BOM) (11) 23
Writ Petition No.1722 of 1993
Rahul Nerlekar i/b N.M. Nerlekar for the Petitioners, Shri M.P. Vashi for the Respondent
Kalyan Citizens' Education Society and Birla College of Arts, Science & Commerce
Smt. Pushpavati wife of Shrikrishna Wakode
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the order of the College Tribunal which set aside termination of a probationary lecturer and ordered reinstatement with back wages.
Remedy Sought
The petitioners sought to quash the Tribunal's order and uphold the termination of the respondent's services.
Filing Reason
The petitioners challenged the Tribunal's order on the ground that it was contrary to the materials on record and the provisions of law, specifically Statute 418(2) of the Bombay University Statutes.
Previous Decisions
The College Tribunal in Appeal No.28 of 1991 set aside the termination order dated 14-3-1991 and directed reinstatement with full back wages and consequential benefits.
Issues
Whether the termination of the respondent's services was in compliance with Statute 418(2) of the Bombay University Statutes?
Whether the College Tribunal erred in ordering reinstatement with full back wages?
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioners argued that the Tribunal ignored documents showing due compliance with Statute 418(2) as the decision to terminate was taken by the Governing Body and communicated under the signatures of the Chairman and Principal.
The respondent supported the Tribunal's order, contending that the management failed to produce any resolution of the Governing Body authorizing the termination.
Ratio Decidendi
The termination of a probationary lecturer is invalid if the management fails to produce a resolution of the Governing Body as required by Statute 418(2) of the Bombay University Statutes. The order of termination signed by the Chairman and Principal without a Governing Body resolution does not comply with the statute.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioners challenge the order dated 22-10-1992 passed in Appeal No.28 of 1991 by the College Tribunal.
The respondent herein was appointed as a Lecturer on probation for a period of 24 months with effect from 17-7-1990...
The impugned order is sought to be challenged on the ground that the same is contrary to the materials on record as well as to the provisions of law...
Procedural History
The respondent was appointed as a probationary lecturer on 17-7-1990. Her services were terminated by order-cum-notice dated 14-3-1991 with effect from 21-4-1991. She appealed to the College Tribunal, which allowed the appeal on 22-10-1992, setting aside the termination and ordering reinstatement with back wages. The petitioners filed the present writ petition in 1993, which was dismissed on 7-11-2006.
Acts & Sections
- Bombay University Statutes: Statute 418(2)
