ORDER:

The writ petition is filed under Article 226 of Constitution of India, seeking the following main prayer:-

“……..declaring the Circular No. RU/Teaching Estt./Circular/2017, dt. 18.05.2017 issued by the 1^st Respondent as arbitrary, illegal, malafide, discriminatory and unconstitutional violating Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and set aside the same in so far as the Petitioners are concerned and issue consequential directions restraining the Respondents from replacing the Petitioners by any other contract lecturers in pursuance of the Circular No. RU/Teaching Estt./Circular/2017, dt. 18.05.2017 and issue further directions directing the Respondents to continue the Petitioners as contract lecturers till regularizing their services against regular posts and pass…….”

2. Heard Sri S. Karunakar, learned counsel representing the learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt. N. Vijay Santhi, learned Standing Counsel for the 1^st respondent University and the learned Assistant Government Pleader for Higher Education.

Brief case of the petitioners

3. The petitioner Nos.1 to 3 were initially appointed as Teaching Assistant on 01.10.2001, 20.09.2006 and 15.03.2005, respectively, at S.K.University, P.G. Center, Kunool. Thereafter, on an establishment of the 1^st respondent Rayalaseema University at Kurnool, all the petitioners were redesignated as Assistant Professors in Mathematics, Computer Science and Telugu, respectively, on 06.11.2014 on contract basis.

4. It is the case of the petitioners that even though the petitioners are working in the teaching side for more than 10 years as Assistant Professors without any blemish, the 1^st respondent University has not regularized the petitioners’ services and continued to pay the salaries on adhoc basis, which is less than the salaries that are being paid to the regular posts even though the duties discharged by the petitioners are similar to the regular employees.

5. The 1^st respondent University being the autonomous increasing posts and subjects day by day, however, denying for payment of minimum time scale to the petitioners on par with regular lecturers, who worked for 10 years on adhoc basis at the 1^st respondent University and it is the minimum obligation of the 1^st respondent University to treat the equals as equals and regularize the services of the petitioners in view of the decisions rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India.

6. While so, to the petitioners’ utter disgrace, the 1^st respondent University has issued the impugned circular dated 18.05.2017 and chosen to recruit the Assistant Professors/Teaching Assistants on temporary basis and asked the Assistant Professors/Teaching Assistants, who are presently working on contract basis in respective departments, to submit their applications. Hence, having left with no other option, the petitioners filed the present writ petition seeking direction against the action of the respondents from replacing the petitioners by another contract lecturers in pursuance to the impugned circular and also seeking direction against the respondents to continue them as contract lecturers till regularizing their services against the regular posts.

Brief case of the respondents

7. In the counter affidavit filed by the 1^st respondent University, it is stated that the petitioners were engaged purely on a temporary and contractual basis as Teaching Assistants/Assistant Professors without undergoing the regular selection process prescribed by UGC regulations. The engagement was for a limited period of approximately 11 months in a year, initially at a consolidated salary of Rs. 15,000/- per month, which was subsequently enhanced to Rs.20,000/- and presently Rs.30,000/- per month on mutually agreed terms. There was no notification or constitution of a selection committee with external subject experts at the time of initial engagement, and the petitioners had no vested right to ask for continuation or regularization of their services.

8. Regular teac