SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(All) 428

ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
BEFORE : V.K. SHUKLA AND MAHESH CHANDRA TRIPATHI, JJ.
Dr. R.L. SRIVASTAVA ....Petitioner
Versus
SAM HIGINBOTTOM INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURE AND OTHERS ....Respondents
(Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 63934 of 2015, decided on 7th April, 2016)

Advocates:
Counsel :
Akhilesh Kumar Singh and Radha Kant Ojha for the Petitioner; Amit Negi, Pratik J. Nagar and Ravi Kant for the Respondents.

Headnote:Appointment—Cancellation of—Assistant Animal Scientist under ICAR project on Utilisation of Animal Energy with Enhanced System Efficiency—As per offer of appointment, appointment of petitioner was till termination of project—Said project was closed—Services of petitioner came to an end as Project was over—Since appointment of petitioner in institution till termination of project, petitioner not entitled to any relief of regularisation—No direction could be issued to respondents to regularise service in absence of any existing vacancies—Petitioner not vested right to claim absorption on regular side after closure of project in question. [Paras 31 to 35]

       Result; Petition Dismissed.

       

JUDGMENT

Hon’ble Mahesh Chandra Tripathi, J.—Dr. R.L. Srivastava has prayed for following reliefs :

“a. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 28.10.2015 (Annexure 20 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent No. 3 as well as the order dated 26.3.2015 (Annexure 12 to the writ petition) passed by the respondent No. 1.

b. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Sam Higginbottom Institute of Agriculture, Technology and Sciences, Allahabad-respondent No. 1 to absorb/continue the petitioner in the regular cadre of the teaching staff or any other equivalent post according to the Guidelines and MOU signed between respondent Nos. 1 and 3 while accepting the project and pay the salary on the regular basis month to month.

c. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the ICAR to adjust/absorb the petitioner in some other Centre which is already running under the same project and pay salary to the petitioner.

d. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent not to interfere in peaceful functioning of the petitioner as Animal Scientist (Selection Grade).

e. Any other writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem, fit and proper in view of the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Brief facts giving rise to the writ petition are that Allahabad Agricultural Institute, as it was then called, (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Institution’) was established and recognized initially under the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973 (in short, the Act 1973). The institution in question was affiliated with University of Allahabad. In the year 2000 the institution got the status of Deemed University under the provisions contained in University Grants Commission Act and Rules framed thereunder and also under the Act 1973. The Indian Council of Agricultural Research, New Delhi (in short, ‘ICAR’) vide its letter dated 15th November, 1984 floated a Project known as “All India Coordinated Research Project for Increase and Utilization of Animal Energy with Enhance System Efficiency” (hereinafter referred to as ‘the project’) and the said project was sanctioned for institution in the year 1984. The project in question started with effect from 1.7.1987. The project was meant for scientific study on increase utilization of the animal energy and the same was opened at 7 places. The said project was sanctioned from A.P. CESS (Agriculture Produces) Funds. In the year 1983 the ICAR issued general guidelines for running the said project. As per general guidelines, a person under the said project would be appointed in accordance with normal recruitment rules and procedures applicable to the State Government/Grantee institution and the staff appointed will for all purposes be treated as employees of the grantee institution as a part of its approved cadre and will be subject to the administrative control of that institution. The scale of pay, allowances, promotions etc. applicable to the staff of the project will be the same as admissible under the grantee institution. A Memorandum of Understanding reached between the ICAR and the institution and they signed the said agreement.

3. The Board of Directors of the institution sanctioned several posts including the post of Assistant Animal Scientist in the aforesaid project. The vacancy in question was advertised in daily newspaper ‘Northern India Patrika’ on 11.7.1987. In pursuance of the aforesaid advertisement the petitioner applied for and was offered appointment letter dated 29.9.1988 in the ICAR project on ‘Utilisation of Animal Energy with Enhanced System Efficiency’ as Assistant Animal Scientist in the Department of Agricultural Engineering of the institution with effect from as early as possible but not later than October 10, 1988 to 31.3.1990 or till the termination of the project, whichever is earlier. The appointment letter dated 29.9.1988 rea




































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

SupremeToday

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top