Case Note & Summary
The case involved the termination of a Lecturer in Chemistry, Vijay Santosh Beldar, by the Principal of Arts, Commerce and Science College, Jamner, which was managed by Jamner Taluka Education Society. The petitioner was appointed on 30th December 1991 after a regular selection process conducted by a Selection Committee constituted under the North Maharashtra University Act, 1989. His appointment was duly approved by the North Maharashtra University on 4th March 1992. On 15th March 1993, the Principal issued a communication stating that his services would stand terminated from the academic year commencing June 1993, citing reasons such as finalisation of workload after admissions, pendency of backlog, and unsatisfactory work. Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred an appeal under Section 47 of the North Maharashtra University Act before the University and College Tribunal. The Tribunal, by judgment dated 5th August 1996, dismissed the appeal as having become infructuous, holding that the petitioner's continuation depended on availability of workload and that he being the junior-most Lecturer was liable to accept such position. The petitioner then filed the writ petition in 1998 challenging the termination and the Tribunal's order. During the pendency of the petition, the Joint Director of Higher Education filed an affidavit in 2026 stating that as per a government resolution dated 11th February 2026, five sanctioned posts of Lecturer in Chemistry were admissible in the college, of which only two were filled and three remained vacant. The management had also issued a fresh advertisement in 2025 for teaching posts. The petitioner argued that the Principal had no authority to terminate his services; the reasons given were not valid; and the Tribunal failed to examine the legality of the termination. The respondents, though served, did not appear except the State which submitted that it was not responsible for the termination and should not be burdened with back wages. The court held that the Principal lacked any statutory authority to terminate the services of a Lecturer appointed through a regular selection process and whose appointment was approved by the University. The communication dated 15th March 1993 was therefore void ab initio. The Tribunal had failed to address the fundamental issue of competence and had erroneously dismissed the appeal. The subsequent developments showing vacant posts further demonstrated that the original justification of lack of workload was unfounded. The court quashed the termination and the Tribunal's order, directed reinstatement from the date of termination with continuity of service, and awarded 50% back wages from the date of filing of the writ petition (9th September 1998) until reinstatement, to be paid by respondent nos. 1 and 2 within four months. Rule was made absolute with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination of Lecturer - Competence of Authority - North Maharashtra University Act, 1989 - The appointment of the petitioner as Lecturer in Chemistry was made after following a regular selection process by a duly constituted Selection Committee and was approved by the University. The Principal, without any statutory authority, issued a communication terminating the services on grounds of alleged reduction in workload, backlog and unsatisfactory work. Held that the Principal lacked jurisdiction and the termination was void. (Paras 20-22) B) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Judicial Review of Tribunal's Order - Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India, Section 47, North Maharashtra University Act, 1989 - The University and College Tribunal dismissed the petitioner's appeal as infructuous without examining the legality of the termination order. High Court held that the Tribunal failed to exercise its jurisdiction and therefore its order was unsustainable. (Paras 22, 24) C) Service Law - Reduction in Workload - Effect on Employment - Once appointed through a regular process, a Lecturer cannot be terminated unilaterally by the Principal on the ground of reduction in workload absent statutory authority and proper procedure. (Paras 21, 23-24) D) Evidence - Subsequent Events - Relevance in Service Disputes - Affidavit of Joint Director confirmed that three sanctioned posts of Lecturer in Chemistry were vacant as of 2026, negating the original justification of lack of workload. The court held that this further supported reinstatement. (Paras 12-13, 23) E) Remedies - Reinstatement and Back Wages - Discretion under Article 226 - Considering that the termination was void ab initio and the petitioner was not gainfully employed, the court ordered reinstatement with continuity from the date of termination (1993) but limited back wages to 50% from the date of filing of the writ petition (1998) until reinstatement, balancing equities. (Paras 25-29)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the communication dated 15.03.1993 issued by the Principal terminating the petitioner's services was legal and within the power of the Principal under the North Maharashtra University Act, 1989
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The communication dated 15.03.1993 and the judgment and order of the University and College Tribunal dated 05.08.1996 are quashed and set aside. The petitioner is directed to be reinstated in service from the date of termination (June 1993) with continuity of service. Back wages are restricted to 50% from the date of filing of the writ petition (09.09.1998) until reinstatement, which shall be paid by respondent Nos.1 and 2 within four months. Rule made absolute with no order as to costs.
Law Points
- Termination order passed by an authority lacking jurisdiction is void ab initio
- reduction in workload does not empower Principal to unilaterally terminate a duly selected and approved Lecturer
- University and College Tribunal must examine legality of termination on merits
- appointment approved by University creates a right to continue until lawfully terminated
- employer cannot benefit from its own illegality
