Honble SINGH, CJ.–This appeal is directed against the order of the learned single judge dated 27.5.2003 rendered in CW 2006/2003 whereby the writ petition of the first respondent was allowed and the order dated 25.4.2003 passed by the second appellant, Mohan Lal University, Udaipur was quashed and both the appellants Vice Chancellor, Mohan Lal Sukhadia University and Mohan Lal Sukhadia University, were directed to take back the first respondent in service as Legal Assistant with all consequential benefits. The appellants were also directed to absorb the first respondent on a regular post from the date when the vacancy arose pursuant to the order of the Honble Supreme Court dated 16.9.1992. By the impugned order the learned single judge also quashed the notice-dated 31.1.2003.

(2). The factual matrix of the case is as follows:-

(3). The first respondent acquired LL.M. Degree in the year 1977. The Udaipur University, re-christened as Mohan Lal Sukhadia University, appointed him as Assistant Professor of Law in its College of Law, Udaipur on ad hoc basis in the regular pay scale of Assistant Professor. The post also entitled the first respondent to regular annual grade increments, which were consequently given during the course of his service in his capacity as Assistant Professor. Later, in the year 1983 the first respondent was interviewed for the purposes of selection to the post of Assistant Professor on regular basis. The first respondent, however, was not selected and as a result whereof, his services were not continued after 31.5.1983. Thus, the first respondent worked as Assistant Professor from 14.11.1977 until 31.5.1983 in the regular pay scale of Assistant Professor on ad hoc basis in the College of Law, Udaipur University.

(4). After a gap of about nine months, the first respondent was again appointed in the appellant University on 23.2.1984 against the post of Legal Assistant but the appointment was liable to be terminated without notice. Subsequently, the post of Legal Assistant was re-designated as Legal Associate by the order of the University dated 19.9.1987. As Legal Assistant/Legal Associate, the first respondent was paid a consolidated salary of Rs. 1, 200/- per month. By the order dated 19.6.1987 the consolidated salary of the first respondent was enhanced to Rs. 1,620/- per month. On 3.3.1990, the University terminated the services of the first respondent with effect from 14.11.1988 on account of the absence of the first respondent from duty. The absence of the first respondent was occasioned by the fact of his having proceeded for undertaking Ph.D. work at University of Delhi.

(5). After the first respondent acquired the Ph.D. Degree, he was again appointed by the appellant University on the post of Legal Assistant by its order dated 8.2.1990 on fixed salary of Rs. 2,070/- per month as stop-gap arrangement until 31.3.1991 or till the selection and appointment of a candidate to the post of Legal Associate, whichever was earlier. The appointment of the first respondent as Legal Associate was extended from time to time and the final extension was granted to him until 31.3.2003 After 31.3.2003 his services were not extended, with the result that he ceased to be an employee of the University. In this regard the Registrar of the appellant University by its letter dated 25.4.2003 informed the Dean, College of Law, Udaipur that the term of temporary appointment of the first respondent as Legal Associate has not been extended beyond 31.3.2003.

(6). In order to complete the narration of facts, it is necessary to refer to a development which took place as a result of filing of a batch of writ petitions before the Supreme Court by Research Assistants/ Associates on account of refusal of the appellant University to grant to them the scale of Rs. 700-1600 recommended by the University Grants Commission with effect from 1.1.1973. Even though the appellant University had implemented the UGC recommendations and granted UGC scale

Click Here to Read the rest of this document