Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, NAGPUR BENCH
ANIL S. KILOR, RAJNISH R. VYAS
Purushottam Ramkrushna Bahetwar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra, Department of Higher and Technical Education – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim of petitioners denied due to non-regularization (Para 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. state contends procedural violations in appointments (Para 8 , 10 , 12) |
| 3. equity not applicable without formal contractor employment (Para 24 , 26 , 34) |
| 4. precedents limit regularization to specific cases (Para 27 , 28 , 33) |
| 5. petition dismissed (Para 35) |
JUDGMENT :
Tussle between citizens and State has resulted into filing of present petition. Visiting lecturers through their counsel have argued that respondent State is not acting as an ideal employer, whereas, learned counsel for the State has argued that nature of appointment of the petitioners do not entitle them to claim regularization and permanency in service.
3. The petitioners in the instant petition claims to be the visiting lecturers, who were working at the time of filing of writ petition in various Government Polytechnic Colleges across the State, for years together, without any interruption. It is their case that though their appointment is by valid selection process, preceded by issuance of advertisement, conducting of interviews and though they are rendering and performing duties of regular lecturers, State is denying them the b
Temporary or contractual employees lack legal entitlement to regularization unless appointed through lawful selection processes as established by precedent.
Since there are no sanctioned posts on which any of these petitioners were appointed as irregular appointments, no such directions are warranted.
Temporary employees lack a legal right to regularization unless appointed per relevant rules; participation in selection waives claims for regularization.
Regularization of part-time employees must adhere to the principles of regular appointment and cannot be granted as a back-door entry.
Long service on a contractual basis does not confer a legal right to regularization without a formal scheme in place, as established by Supreme Court precedents.
The court recognized the right of the State to appoint persons on temporary basis to meet its exigencies, and held that the failure of the ATTC to maintain the student to lecturer ratio and the petit....
Point of Law : The appointment of such an employee should not be illegal, even if irregular. Where the appointments are not made or continued against sanctioned posts or where the persons appointed d....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for conducting regular selections for the post of Asstt. Professor in accordance with the UGC Regulations of 2010, and the emphasis....
Prolonged service of over ten years without legal hindrance can qualify employees for regularization, regardless of the initial nature of their appointments.
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
