Dismissed

Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj Kanpur University and Another v. Ajeet Pratap Singh and 41 Others

Allahabad HC11 Jan 2022SPLAD/856/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Division Bench dismissed two special appeals by Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj Kanpur University challenging interim orders allowing self-finance faculty and non-teaching staff to continue working. The Court found no ground for interference and expedited the main writ petitions.

What did the court decide?

Special Appeal No. 856/2021 and 860/2021 dismissed; writ petitions listed together for hearing on March 28, 2022.

Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj Kanpur University and… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Chief Justice's Court Serial No.26

¶2

**HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD *****

¶3

SPECIAL APPEAL DEFECTIVE No. - 856 of 2021

¶4

(Arising out of Writ-A No.11566 of 2021)

¶5

Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj Kanpur University and another

¶6

.....Appellant

¶7

Through :- Mr. Rohit Pandey, Advocate

¶8

v/s

¶9

Ajeet Pratap Singh and others .....Respondent

¶10

Through :- Mr. Ashok Khare, Senior Advocate with Mr. Siddharth Khare, Advocate for respondent Nos.1 to 39 and Mr. Ajay Prakash Paul, State Law Officer for respondent No.40

¶11

CORAM : HON'BLE RAJESH BINDAL, CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE PIYUSH AGRAWAL, JUDGE

¶12

ORDER

¶13

This order will also dispose of Special Appeal Defective No.860 of 2021, titled as Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Mahahraj Kanpur University and another v. Vaibhav Saxena and others.

¶14

The order dated September 16, 2021 passed by the learned Single Judge granting interim relief to the private respondents allowing them to function as lecturers and pay them emoluments, has been impugned by filing the present intra-court appeal.

¶15

The contention raised by the learned counsel for the appellant is that the private respondents were appointed not by way of a regular selection process but in terms of an advertisement issued for walk in interview. Though they are continuing for quite some time, however, now the University seeks to carry out regular selection process entering into a contract with the selected candidates which is provided for appointment of teacher in the Institutes functioning under the Self Finance Scheme. The selection process is already over. The appointments are to be made.

¶16

2 SPLAD No. 856 of 2021

¶17

On the other hand, Mr. Khare, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the private respondents submitted that the private respondents had been appointed starting from the year 2003. They are working satisfactorily. There is no complaint against them. For appointment against the Self Finance Scheme also Government Orders issued from time to time are applicable. Even now the University is not going to make appointments on regular basis, rather will be appointing faculty on contract basis for 3 to 5 years whereas the private respondents are working for a long time. He further referred to order dated October 4, 2021 passed by Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal Defective No.682 of 2021, titled as Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj Kanpur University and others v. Puneet Mehrotra and others and order dated November 10, 2021 passed in Special Appeal Defective No.692 of 2021, titled as Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj Kanpur University and others v. Abhishek Kumar Gupta and others, where similar issues were under consideration with reference to non teaching staffs employed under the Self Finance Scheme in the appellant University. In those appeals also the appellant University challenged the interim orders passed by the learned Single Judge. The appeals were dismissed and hearing of the writ petitions was expedited. The submission is the present appeal may also be dismissed.

¶18

In response, the learned counsel for the appellant University submitted that in the case of respondent No.21 namely Mr. Brijendra Singh, the course itself has been closed, hence he cannot be allowed to continue there being no work available for him. He has filed a contempt petition alleging non compliance of the order passed by the learned Single Judge.

¶19

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we do not find any case is made out for interference with the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge. It is not in dispute that the private respondents are continuing with the appellant University as teaching faculty in various courses under the Self Finance Scheme from 2003 onwards. Different private respondents were appointed in different years. It is not the case of the appellant University that there is any complaint regarding working of the private respondents. The Division Bench of this Court in Puneet Mehrotra and others' case (supra) has considered the case

¶20

3 SPLAD No. 856 of 2021

¶21

pertaining to non teaching staff under the Self Finance Scheme in the appellant University. In that appeal as well the interim stay granted by the learned Single Judge was under challenge. The appeal was dismissed and hearing of the writ petition was expedited.

¶22

We also find to appreciate the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the parties, it would be appropriate if the writ petition is heard and finally disposed of expeditiously, as at this stage in case the interim stay granted in favour of the private respondents is vacated, they will suffer irreparable loss and will be shunted out of service though they are working for quite some time with the University, having been granted extensions from time to time.

¶23

As far as the argument raised by the learned counsel for the appellant University regarding the discontinuance of course with reference to respondent No.21 is concerned, he shall be at liberty to take appropriate steps/pleadings either in the pending writ petition or in the contempt petition.

¶24

The present appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.

¶25

The writ petitions in question and Writ-A No.10703 of 2021, titled as Puneet Mehrotra and others v. State of U.P. and others and Writ-A No.10707 of 2021, titled as Abhishek Kumar Gupta and others v. State of U.P. and others, which pertain to the same University and related to the other employees working under the Self Finance Scheme be listed together before the learned Single Judge as per the roster on March 28, 2022.

¶26

(Piyush Agrawal, J.) (Rajesh Bindal, C.J.)

¶27

Allahabad 11.01.2022 Rakesh/Kuldeep

¶28

Whether the order is speaking : Yes/No Whether the order is reportable : Yes/No

Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj Kanpur University and Another v. Ajeet Pratap Singh and 41 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chhatrapati Shahu Ji Maharaj Kanpur University and Another v. Ajeet Pratap Singh and 41 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

In Re - Secretary High Court Bar Association Allahabad Vs

Kishan Pal Singh Vs Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. and Others

C/M Bharashtrachar Virodhi Samaj Kalyan Sansthan and Anr. Vs State of U.P. and Others

Ashok Kumar Vs State of U.P. and 4 Others

Sarvesh Kumar Dubey Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Dilip Kumar Yadav Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others