Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, a cooperative society and its affiliated colleges, challenged the judgment of the University Tribunal dated 6.11.1997, which allowed the appeal of respondent No.1, Dr. Fakira Chintaman Mahajan, setting aside his oral termination dated 10.10.1995 and granting him arrears of salary and allowances from that date. The respondent was a confirmed lecturer in the petitioner college from 1984 to 1992. He left to join another college as Principal on 1.8.1992 but was disengaged on 4.3.1993. He reported back to the petitioner and was allowed to resume duties from 5.10.1993. However, on 10.10.1995, he was orally terminated without any written order or disciplinary proceedings. The University Tribunal found the termination illegal and ordered reinstatement with back wages. The High Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, noting that the termination was in violation of natural justice and the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994. The court dismissed the petition, confirming the Tribunal's order.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination - Oral Termination - Illegal - Natural Justice - University Statutes - The oral termination of a confirmed lecturer without any written order or disciplinary proceedings is illegal and violative of principles of natural justice and the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994. (Paras 1-6)
B) Service Law - Reinstatement - Back Wages - University Tribunal - The University Tribunal has jurisdiction to order reinstatement with full back wages and allowances from the date of illegal termination, as the termination was void ab initio. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the oral termination of a confirmed lecturer without following due process and natural justice is valid, and whether the University Tribunal's order of reinstatement with back wages is sustainable.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, confirming the University Tribunal's order dated 6.11.1997, which set aside the oral termination of respondent No.1 and granted him arrears of salary and allowances from 10.10.1995.
Law Points
- Oral termination is illegal
- Natural justice must be followed
- University Tribunal has jurisdiction
- Reinstatement with back wages is proper remedy
Case Details
2017 LawText (BOM) (07) 73
Writ Petition No. 924 of 1998
Shri Mewara Rajesh H. for Petitioner, Shri Golewar V.P. h/f Shri Joshi A.R. for Respondent 1, Shri Bolkar Yogesh h/f Shri Raghuwanshi R.B. for Respondent 2, Shri Bhagat N.T. AGP for Respondent 3
Jalgaon Zilla Maratha Vidhya Prasarak Cooperative Samaj Ltd. and others
Dr. Fakira Chintaman Mahajan and others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the judgment of the University Tribunal which set aside the oral termination of a confirmed lecturer and granted reinstatement with back wages.
Remedy Sought
Petitioners (management) sought to quash the University Tribunal's order dated 6.11.1997.
Filing Reason
The management challenged the Tribunal's order allowing the appeal of the respondent/employee and setting aside his oral termination.
Previous Decisions
The University Tribunal in Appeal No. NM 6 of 1997 allowed the appeal of respondent No.1, set aside his oral termination dated 10.10.1995, and granted arrears of salary and allowances from that date.
Issues
Whether the oral termination of a confirmed lecturer without following due process is legal.
Whether the University Tribunal's order of reinstatement with back wages is sustainable.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner relied on the judgment of the Delhi High Court in Surendra Kumar Tiwari v. NTPC.
Respondent No.1 argued that his termination was oral and without any disciplinary proceedings, violating natural justice.
Ratio Decidendi
Oral termination of a confirmed employee without any written order or disciplinary proceedings is illegal and violative of natural justice. The University Tribunal has jurisdiction to order reinstatement with full back wages.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner / management has challenged the judgment of the University Tribunal, dated 6.11.1997, by which, Appeal No. NM 6 of 1997, filed by respondent No.1 / appellant has been allowed and his oral termination dated 10.10.1995 has been set aside.
He has been granted arrears of salary and allowances from 10.10.1995.
Procedural History
The respondent was orally terminated on 10.10.1995. He filed an appeal before the University Tribunal, which allowed the appeal on 6.11.1997. The management filed the present writ petition on 26.3.1998, which was admitted and interim stay granted. The High Court dismissed the petition on 19.7.2017.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994:
