Back
2022 Supreme(SC) 1474
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat, Sudhanshu Dhulia, JJ.
Dr. Jacob K. Daniel – Appellant
Versus
Mahatma Gandhi University, Priyadarshini Hills & Anr. – Respondents
Civil Appeal Nos. 3887-3888 of 2022 (Arising Out of SLP (C) Nos. 4255-4256 of 2018)
Decided On : 11-05-2022
Ms. Praseena Elizabeth Joseph, Advocate, Mr. Lakshay Saini, Advocate, For the Appellant / Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Advocate, Mr. P.N. Misra, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Sakshi Kakkar, Advocate, Ms. Surin Ipe, Advocate, Mr. Shakti Singh, Advocate, Ms. Urvashi Arya, Advocate, Mr. Anmol Kheta, Advocate, Mr. Lakshay Mehta, Advocate, Mr. Karan Nair Gogia, Advocate, Mr. Kumar Kashyap, Advocate, Mr. Harshad V. Hameed, Advocate, Mr. Dileep Poolakkot, Advocate, Ms. Ashly Harshad, Advocate, Mr. Rohith R. Kartha, Advocate, For the Respondent.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of documents and communications to determine the nature of an appointment as permanent or temporary.
Headnote:
Appointment - Permanent vs Temporary - The court held that the appellant's appointment as a Lecturer in Mathematics was permanent based on the documents and communications, and therefore, he was entitled to retiral and pensionary benefits.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was appointed as a Lecturer in Mathematics in a university, and the issue was whether his appointment was permanent or temporary.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant's appointment was permanent based on the documents and communications, and therefore, he was entitled to retiral and pensionary benefits. The court allowed the appeals and directed the university to make the necessary payments to the appellant.
Issues: The main issue was the nature of the appellant's appointment as a Lecturer in Mathematics - whether it was permanent or temporary.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the documents, including the appointment letter and communications regarding the appellant's pay, to determine that his appointment was permanent.
Final Decision: The appeals were allowed, and the university was directed to compute and make over all retiral and pensionary benefits to the appellant within eight weeks.
ORDER
1. These appeals challenge the judgment and order dated 20.11.2015 passed in Writ Appeal No. 339 of 2015; and order dated 20.09.2017 passed in Review Petition No.3 of 2016 arising out of the disposal of Writ Appeal No. 339 of 2015, by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam.
2. The Special Leave Petitions from which the instant appeals arise were initially listed with batch of petitions [i.e. SLP (C) Nos. 4251-4252 of 2018] filed by the teaching staff of Mahatma Gandhi University questioning the judgment and orders which are presently under challenge.
3. The appeals filed by other members of the teaching staff were allowed and the judgment and orders under appeal were set-aside and the order dated 08.01.2014 passed by the Single Judge was restored. The matter concerning the instant appellant was however segregated as some of the documents were found to indicate that the appointment of the appellant was temporary. The matter was therefore directed to be listed in due course.
4. We have heard Ms. Praseena Elizabeth Joseph, learned Advocate in support of the appeals and Mr. Sidharth Luthra, learned Senior Advocate for the University.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant invited our attention to the Notification dated 15.07.1996 inviting applications from the qualified candidates for filling up inter alia post of Lecturer in Mathematics in the Pay Scale of Rs. 2200-4000/-. The appellant who was then working as a Senior Lecturer in Pondicheriy Engineering College offered his candidature and he was selected. The appointment letter issued to the appellant was as under:
"With reference to his/her application for the post of Lecturer in the College of Engineering, Thodupuzha, under School of Technology and Applied Sciences of the University, Sri Dr. Jacob K. Daniel is informed that he has been selected for appointment as Lecturer in Mathematics in the scale of Rs. 2,200 - 4,000 /-. He is therefore, directed to report for duty before the Director, School of Technology and Applied Sciences forthwith along with a Medical Certificate of fitness as required in Rule-13 Part I Kerala Services Rules obtained from a Medical Officer not below the rank of Assistant Surgeon in a Government Hospital.
He is informed that his appointment in the University will be governed by the provisions in Mahatma Gandhi University First Statutes, 1991."
6. Thereafter, at the request of the appellant, the matter was considered by the University for protecting his basic pay which he was drawing as a Senior Lecturer in Pondicheriy Engineering College. By communication dated 31.07.1998, the pay of the appellant was fixed at Rs. 3500/- in same pay scale.
7. All these developments are indicative that the appointment of the appellant was not on any temporary basis but it was a permanent appointment in the University.
8. We, therefore, allow these appeals on same terms as indicated in our judgment and order dated 28.02.2019 passed in Abdul Hakeem MA. & Others v. Mahatma Gandhi University & Others, Civil Appeal Nos. 4251-4252 of 2018, reported in (2019) 16 SCC 328.
9. Since the appellant has retired, all the retiral and pensionary benefits shall be computed on the basis that he was in permanent employment of the University and all the dues shall be made over to the appellant within eight weeks from today.
10. These appeals are accordingly allowed, with no order as to costs.
