By the Court.—This writ petition has been filed for a direction upon the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioner as a Lecturer in the Department of Chemistry of the University of Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the ‘University’) in accordance with the provisions of Section 31(3)(c) of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’) which was amended by U.P. Act No. 23 of 2004 w.e.f 20th May, 2004.

2. The petitioner claims to have been appointed for teaching in the Sheila Dhar Institute of Social Science of the University with effect from 1992 on payment of Rs. 60 per practical class which was subsequently enhanced. It is on the basis of such working that the petitioner seeks substantive appointment in terms of the provisions of Section 31(3)(c) of the Act which was amended in the year 2004 w.e.f. 20th May, 2004.

3. A perusal of the writ petition indicates that the Vice-Chancellor of the University had approved the appointment of the petitioner to assist in the six practical classes per week on payment of Rs. 60 per practical class subject to a maximum of Rs. 1600/- per month for the academic session. Such similar orders were passed for the subsequent academic sessions and the petitioner continued to assist in taking the practical classes as indicated in the orders. The amount paid per practical class was subsequently increased to Rs. 70/- per practical class and then to Rs. 100/- per practical class. It is on the basis of such working that the petitioner contends that he had been appointed in the year 1992 as a part-time Lecturer in the Department of Chemistry and, therefore, he should be given substantive appointment under the aforesaid provisions of Section 31(3)(c) of the Act.

4. In support of his contention the learned Counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon Statute 10.02 of the First Statutes of the University which provides that part time Lecturers may be appointed in subjects in which, in the opinion of the Academic Council, such Lecturers are required in the interest of teaching or for other reasons and that such part time Lecturers may receive salary ordinarily not exceeding one half of the initial salary of the scale for the post to which they are appointed. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner further is that the process for giving the benefit of substantive appointment under the provisions of Section 31(3)(c) of the Act had been initiated by the Executive Council on 19th December, 2004 but in view of the interim order dated 19th January, 2004 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 2427 of 2005 it was not finalised. This petition has been filed for giving substantive appointment as Lecturer as he had been appointed prior to 31st December, 1997 and a substantive vacancy is available in the Department and he also possesses the qualification required for regular appointment.

5. We have carefully considered the submissions advanced by the learned Counsel for the parties.

6. The basic issue, therefore, that arises for our consideration in this petition is whether substantive appointment can be given to the petitioner under the provisions of Section 31(3)(c) of the Act. In order to appreciate the contentions of the learned Counsel for the parties it would, therefore, be appropriate to reproduce Section 31(3)(c) of the Act as it stands after its amendment by U.P. Act No. 23 of 2004 and the same is as follows :

“31. Appointment of Teachers......................

3(a) ..........................................................

3(b) .........................................................

3(c) Any teacher of the University who was appointed as Lecturer/part time Lecturer on or before December 31, 1997 without reference to the Selection Committee by way of a short-term or part time arrangement in accordance with the provisions for the time being in force for such appointment, may be given substantive appointment by the Executive Council, if an