Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sarika d/o Satyavijay Maske, was appointed as an Assistant Professor in Botany at St. Francis De Sales College, Nagpur, on 21 November 2009 on probation for two years. Her appointment was approved by the Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University and the Joint Director of Higher Education, and she was paid regular salary. On 29 January 2011, she was terminated from service with effect from 31 January 2011 on the sole ground of insufficient workload as per norms. She challenged the termination before the University and College Tribunal, which dismissed her appeal on 16 September 2015. Aggrieved, she filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court. The legal issue was whether termination without prior notice or opportunity of hearing was valid. The petitioner argued that the termination violated Ordinance 6 of Nagpur University, which requires a notice before termination on the ground of insufficient workload. The respondents contended that the termination was simpliciter and no notice was required. The court analyzed the provisions of the Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994, and Ordinance 6, and found that the termination was based on a specific ground and was stigmatic, thus requiring compliance with natural justice. The court held that the termination was illegal and set aside the Tribunal's order, directing reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages. The judgment emphasizes that even a probationer is entitled to a hearing when termination is based on a specific ground like insufficient workload.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination of Probationer - Insufficient Workload - Section 61 of Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 and Ordinance 6 of Nagpur University - Termination of a probationary Assistant Professor on the exclusive ground of insufficient workload without any prior notice or opportunity of hearing was challenged. The court held that the termination was illegal as it violated the principles of natural justice and the specific provisions of Ordinance 6, which require a notice to be given before such termination. The Tribunal's order dismissing the appeal was set aside. (Paras 1-10) B) Natural Justice - Right to Hearing - Termination on Specific Ground - Even a probationer is entitled to an opportunity of hearing when termination is based on a specific ground like insufficient workload, as per the University Ordinances. The court held that the termination order was stigmatic and required compliance with natural justice. (Paras 5-10) C) University Law - Ordinance 6 - Notice Requirement - Section 61 of Maharashtra Universities Act, 1994 - Ordinance 6 of Nagpur University mandates that before terminating a teacher on the ground of insufficient workload, the college must give a notice to the teacher. The court found that no such notice was given, rendering the termination invalid. (Paras 5-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the termination of the petitioner from service on the ground of insufficient workload without giving any prior notice or opportunity of hearing is legal and valid?
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the judgment and order of the University and College Tribunal dated 16-09-2015, and quashed the termination order dated 29-01-2011. The respondents were directed to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service and full back wages.
Law Points
- Termination without notice or opportunity of hearing is illegal
- Termination on ground of insufficient workload requires prior notice and opportunity to show cause
- Section 61 of Maharashtra Universities Act
- 1994 mandates compliance with University Ordinances
- Ordinance 6 of Nagpur University requires notice before termination on ground of insufficient workload
- Natural justice principles apply to termination of probationer if based on specific ground
