The main legal point established in the judgment is that the termination of a temporary employee was not in violation of the statutory provisions, and long service as a temporary employee does not confer the right to claim regularization.

J.B PARDIWALA, J.

By this application under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, the applicant - The North (Uttar) Gujarat University calls in question the legality and validity of the order dated 23/03/2000 passed by the Gujarat Universities Services Tribunal at Ahmedabad in the Application No. 5 of 1996 filed by the respondent no. 1 herein.

2. It appears from the materials on record that the respondent no. 1 herein was appointed by the University vide office order dated 11/04/1994 as a Sweeper purely on a temporary basis. The order of appointment dated 11/04/1994, Annexure-C to this application, Page-12 makes it abundantly clear that the appointment was temporary and it was also made clear that the service could be put to an end without any notice and at any point of time. It appears that after a period of one year, the services of the respondent no. 1 came to be terminated as the University felt that the services were not required.

3. Being dissatisfied, the respondent no. 1 preferred an application being Application No. 5 of 1996 before the Tribunal.

4. The Tribunal by order dated 23/03/2000 allowed the application. The operative part of the impugned order reads as under:-

42…………..In that case of the circumstances, it clearly appears to me that, action of the University, paying less remuneration to the applicant, is unjustified, and, therefore, University is required to be directed to remuneration, which normally is available to Class-IV employees, on minimum pay scale, to the applicant, after deducting the remuneration, already paid, for the period, for which applicant remained in job, except for one day, i.e. 1.3.95, the day, on which applicant was given artificial break, on which day, he has not worked, on the basis of principle of equal pay for equal work. It clearly appears that, appointment of applicant was against the post sanctioned. I have held in this order that, in absence of otherwise, appointment of the applicant was after following the proper procedure. It appears that, before terminating the services, as mandatory provision of Gujarat Universities Services Tribunal Act, 1983, in the form of section 14(1) is not followed, the termination requires to be held bad in law and is hereby held accordingly.

43. In view of above discussion in this order, the termination order, dtd. 8.12.95, passed by the University, is hereby quashed and set aside. Applicant is hereby ordered to be re-instated in the service by the Opponent-University, from which he was terminated. As it appears clearly from the oral evidence of the applicant that, after his services are terminated, he is not doing any work, and as nothing contrary to the same is established by the University, needless to say that, reinstatement to follow with full back-wages, which are directed to be paid this order.

In view of discussion in this order, University is hereby directed to pay the difference of regular salary, to be paid to class-IV employees of opponent-University, at minimum pay scale, with change in the same from time to time after deducting the remuneration already paid to the applicant, from the date, from which applicant entered in the job with the University, except for one day, i.e. 1.3.95 University is hereby further directed permanently, not to make the change in conditions of service of applicant, as adjudicated by this order, till he remains in job, except in accordance with law.

In view of above discussion, the matter is hereby allowed to the aforesaid extent. In the facts and circumstances of the case, no order as to costs. In view of section 7(2) of Gujarat Universities Services Tribunal Act, 1983, as the termination order of the applicant is declared as wrong, unlawful and otherwise unjustified by this order, University to comply the direction of reinstatement, given by this order forthwith.

5. Being dissatisfied, the University has come up with this application.

6. Mr. Shelat, the learned counsel appearing for the University submitt