Petitioner, a Principal absorbed as Senior Grade Lecturer after college closure, challenged the demotion and demand to lower his payscale. High Court held absorption is not a matter of right and dismissal of petition was upheld.
Petition dismissed; petitioner not entitled to absorption as Principal or protection of Principal payscale.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION
Writ Petition No.45ll of 2005
Shri Suresh S Gavali....petitioner
vs
The State of Mah and ors ... respondents
Mr.M S Topkar for petitioner
Mr V.P.Malvankar AGP for State
CORAM: A.P.SHAH & D.Y.CHANDRACHUD JJ.
Dated 3.8.2005
P.C:
. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
. The petitioner was working as a Principal of
Shivajirao More College conducted by Priyadarshini
Education and Research Institute at Kolhapur. The
said college was permanently closed from Academic
Year 2003-04 on account of failure of management to
comply with the conditions of affiliation and
mismanagement of the college by the trustees. The
petitioner has been absorbed as a Senior Grade
Lecturer in Venkatesh College,Ichalkaranji vide
order dated 25.5.2004 of respondent no. 2 in terms
of Government Resolutions issued by the State of
Maharashtra from time to time in this behalf.
. Mr. Topkar contends that the petitioner cannot
be asked to work as a lecturer and further refusal
to protect his payscale as a Principal was also
illegal. According to him the petitioner was
declared surplus when he was Principal and drawing
salary in higher payscale and therefore the order
of respondent no 2 amounted to demotion and refusal
to protect payscale is also not sustainable.
. We do not find any merit in the contention of
Mr.Topkar. Petitioner cannot claim absorption as a
matter of right. He has been absorbed as a Senior
Grade Lecturer in accordance with relevant
Government Resolutions. The said Government
Resolutions provide for absorption in the post of
lecturer and not as a Principal. Hence no relief
can be granted to the petitioner. Petition is
dismissed.
3 issues framed by the court
Whether an educational institution employee declared surplus as Principal can claim absorption as matter of right as Principal.
Whether refusal to protect the petitioner's payscale after absorption as a Senior Grade Lecturer is illegal.
Whether absorption of a surplus employee is available as a matter of right under relevant Government Resolutions.
Shri Suresh S Gavali
The State of Maharashtra
A.P.SHAH
D.Y.CHANDRACHUD
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court