Back
Bombay High Court
DESHMUKH,PENDSE
Malini Ganesh Tarlekar - Appellant
Versus
Hansraj Madhavrao Patil - Respondent
Decided On : 02/14/1978
The Poona University Act, 1974, and its various statutes and regulations govern the terms and conditions of service of teachers in affiliated colleges and constituent recognized institutions. The Act defines 'teacher' and 'teacher of the university' and provides for the recognition of teachers of the university. The age of retirement for teachers in constituent colleges is 60 years, with a limited extension up to the end of the academic year in which the teacher's birth date falls. Post-graduate teachers (papers) in constituent recognized institutions and/or affiliated colleges can be extended up to the age of 65, subject to certain conditions. The Act also provides for the composition and term of office of various university bodies, including the Board of Studies, the Academic Council, and the Executive Council.
Fact of the Case:
Respondent No. 1, a teacher in a constituent college, was elected as a member of the Board of Studies of Poona University in 1975. He was subsequently elected as Chairman of the Board of Studies and became an ex-officio member of the Academic Council and the Executive Council. In 1976, the Executive Council granted respondent No. 1 an extension of service till 15th March 1978. The petitioners, who are academicians, challenged respondent No. 1's membership of the university bodies on the ground that he had ceased to be a teacher on attaining the age of 60 years and that the extension granted to him was illegal.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that respondent No. 1 was not a post-graduate teacher and that the diploma in Labour Laws and Labour Welfare was not a post-graduate diploma. Therefore, respondent No. 1 was not entitled to any extension of service beyond the age of 60 years. However, the court also held that respondent No. 1's election to the Board of Studies was valid and that he was entitled to continue as a member of the Board of Studies till April 1978. Consequently, respondent No. 1 was entitled to continue as a member of the Academic Council and the Executive Council as an ex-officio member.
Issues: 1. Whether respondent No. 1 was a post-graduate teacher and entitled to an extension of service beyond the age of 60 years. 2. Whether the diploma in Labour Laws and Labour Welfare was a post-graduate diploma. 3. Whether respondent No. 1's election to the Board of Studies was valid. 4. Whether respondent No. 1 was entitled to continue as a member of the Academic Council and the Executive Council as an ex-officio member.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court interpreted the relevant provisions of the Poona University Act, 1974, and its statutes and regulations to determine the eligibility criteria for post-graduate teachers and the conditions for extension of service beyond the age of 60 years. 2. The court examined the nature of the diploma in Labour Laws and Labour Welfare and concluded that it was not a post-graduate diploma in the real sense of the term. 3. The court interpreted the provisions of the Act relating to the composition and term of office of the Board of Studies to determine the validity of respondent No. 1's election. 4. The court applied the relevant provisions of the Act to the facts of the case to determine respondent No. 1's entitlement to continue as a member of the Academic Council and the Executive Council.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, holding that respondent No. 1 was no longer a teacher but was entitled to continue as a member of the Board of Studies, the Academic Council, and the Executive Council till April 1978.
DESHMUKH, J. :- This is a petition by 8 academicians addressed against respondent No. 1 principally for a writ of quo warranto. According to them respondent No. 1 ceases to be a teacher an the Poona University from 4th of Dec. 1976 or at any rate from 15th of March 1977 and thereafter he has no right to hold any office under the University, which was available to him because he was a teacher in a College. That is how they question his membership of the Board of Studies, Academic Council and the Executive Council of the Poona University.
2. In order to understand the dispute and the defences raised, a few facts may be stated : The petitioners have described their status as persons occupying same elected offices in the academic world. It is not necessary to point out those qualifications as they are not strictly relevant for the purpose of disposing of the dispute.
3. Respondent No. 1 was a teacher in the new Law College, Ahmednagar, when he was elected as a member of the Board of Studies of Poona University in April of 1975. Respondent No. 2 is the University itself. Respondent No. 3 is the Registrar of the University and respondent No. 4 is the Vice-Chancellor.
4. Respondent No. 1 is a Bachelor of Arts. In addition he has a Bachelor's Degree in Teaching and Bachelor's Degree in Law. In other words he is B. A. B. T. LL. B. He obtained his B. A. degree in the year 1939 and that of B. T. in the year 1943. Between 1942 and 1955 respondent No. 1 served as an Assistant Teacher in Government High School at Dhulia and Jalgaon. He was also Principal of the Primary training school between 1954 and 1957. In the year 1958 he obtained the LL. B. degree having passed the examination in the First Class. This was a degree from the Poona University. Respondent No. 1 then practised as a lawyer at Dhule between 1958 and 1970. In June 1970 he was appointed Principal of the New Law College, Ahmednagar, which is run by a Society named Ahmednagar Zilla Maratha Vidya Prasarak Samaj. It is to be noted that at the relevant time in 1975 he was also holding the position of the Head of the Department of Law in that College.
5. Respondent No. 1 was elected as a member of the Board of Studies of the University under S.29, Sub-Sec. (2) clause (ii) of the Poona University Act 1974. The Board consists of various representatives, out of which the relevant clause requires that there shall be not more than ten Heads of Departments in Colleges teaching the subjects at the special principal or major level, to be elected from amongst themselves, as prescribed by the statutes. There is no dispute that respondent No. 1 belonged to this electoral college and from it was elected as a member of the Board of Studies under this clause. Later in the meeting of the Board of Studies, he was elected its Chairman. under Sub-Sec. (4) of S.29. This position as an elected Chairman of the Board of Studies gave him membership of the Academic Council under S.25 Sub-Sec. (i) cl.(v). The Chairman of the Board of Studies is one of the many officers who are designated as ex-officio members of the Academic Council. Respondent No. 1 thus became a member of the Academic Council of the Poona University under S.25 Sub-Sec. (1) cl.(v). The Academic Council is authorised to elect three persons representing the Faculties or group of Faculties from amongst its members as prescribed by the Statutes to be the members of the Executive Council. This is provided by Section 23. Sub-Section (1) clause (xi). Under this clause respondent No. 1 was elected by the electoral college of Academic Council to be the member of the Executive Council. So far as the holding of these positions described above are concerned, there is no dispute at all.
6. The next undisputed facts are that respondent No. 1 completed the age of 60 on 4th Dec. 1976. In the statement of facts or the pleadings in the petition it is not clear under what precise provision an application was made by the Secretary of the Society, which em
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
