Teachers kept on temporary posts for decades unreasonable: HC

Create: 07/29/2011 - 10:06

The Delhi High Court has said that teachers made to serve in temporary posts for decades is absolutely “arbitrary” and “unreasonable” and said this practice violated their fundamental right.

"Keeping a person who was fully qualified in a temporary post for over 15 years is, apart from being arbitrary, also unreasonable as it obviously denies such person the benefits of a regular pay scale, the security of tenure, and all other attendant benefits,” said Justice S Muralidhar.

The high court was hearing the petition filed by Nalini Prabhakar for regularisation of her service in its English department of Delhi University's School of Correspondence Courses and Continuing Education. The court also pulled up the institution for citing non-availability of vacancies as a reason.

Justice Muralidhar also took to task the college for contending that the selection process for lecturers was stalled by its managing committee, which had to take up Prabhakar’s case in April 2003, on account of restructuring of the set up of the School of Correspondence Courses.

“The counsel was unable to inform this court when exactly this process of restructuring, which began sometime in October 1996, would come to an end. It seems unreasonable that on the pretext of restructuring the college, all appointments to permanent posts that have been falling vacant over the years in its various departments would not be filled up indefinitely. This, by itself, renders arbitrary the omission of the college to keep its teachers on a temporary basis for a long number of years,” said the court.

While hearing the petition, court also discarded the argument that the Human Resource Development Ministry had, in 2009, imposed a ban on the university against filling up vacant posts of teaching and non-teaching staff without prior approval of the UGC, and also that the DU had advised colleges to recruit and appoint only candidates who had qualified the NET/SLET.

Prabhakar, in her petition, had submitted that she had been working continuously on the temporary post with the college since July 1996. By keeping her temporary for over 14 years, the respondents had violated her fundamental rights by denying her the benefit of regularisation, to which she was entitled by law, she claimed.She also brought on record documents showing that vacant posts were available with the college at subsequent times, but they did not regularise her services on one pretext or another.

Now, the court has directed the managing committee to consider her case in four weeks, and also regularise her services without any benefit of arrears of pay, but from the date on which the first vacancy for a permanent post in the Department of English occurred after her appointment. It also told them to calculate her seniority for pension and other purposes from this date. 

[Source: Indian Express]

Comments

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on

What is reasonable

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on

This is a landmark Judgment that will serve as a precedent for all similar cases in various High Courts in the country.

Quote from: http://www.indiaeducationreview.com/news/teachers-kept-temporary-posts-d...
“While hearing the petition, court also discarded the argument that the Human Resource Development Ministry had, in 2009, imposed a ban on the university against filling up vacant posts of teaching and non-teaching staff without prior approval of the UGC, and also that the DU had advised colleges to recruit and appoint only candidates who had qualified the NET/SLET”.
The SLET instead of UGC NET is accepted if and only the UGC is not conducting any test for the concerned discipline. I found NET/SLET in many notifications of Asst. Professor Post even to the subject which UGC have been conducting NET exam for the one decade. This is the way state governments are polluting the standards proposed by UGC.
Sreekumar linguafranka@yahoo.com
Asst. Professor, Dravidian University

There is a notification from Kurukshetra University for the appointment of more than 50 Assistant Professors on contract base. http://www.kuk.ac.in/userfiles/file/jobs/Notification_TA-2011(2).pdf (Hon. Delhi) Court Judgment should be taken for both “corrective” and “futuristically” also. Why don’t UGC suggest Kurukshethra University to do this appointment as regular based on the High Court Judgment? What prevent this University to appoint it’s faculty permanently now itself? If it is financial problem, check whether those posts are sanctioned by State Government. UGC is encouraging, very often compelling all universities to fill the post regularly, not temporary base.
P. Sreekumar, Asst. Professor in Linguistics
Dravidian University, A.P linguafranka@yahoo.com

This judgement is really a landmark judgement. Many candidates in India are facing the same/similar problems in many indian universities and colleges. This precedent must help them to fight against their exploitation. Our system of recruitment is very confusing and the universities never follow a unique standard though they are recognised by UGC. I think UGC is weak to implement/execute its policies and rules.
Hidayatullah National Law University, Raipur

Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on

This is in contradiction to Hon'ble SC decision in Feb2011 (Mamta Mohanti & others v/s state of orissa) in which backdoor entry by temporary posts was taken seriously and turned down .
So state must appeal against HC Delhi judgement as it will encourage backdoor entry.

About Author

India Education Review
India Education Review is a platform that aims to provide information and resources to senior educators nationwide. Carrying news, interviews, guest articles, case studies, information on training and developmental programs, scholarships and jobs, India Education Review is the platform of choice for the educator community in India today