AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
All the above mentioned writ petitions shall stand decided by
this common order.
The prayer in the present petition is to set aside the
impugned order vide which the services of the petitioners have
been terminated. The arguments raised by the learned counsel for
the petitioners are inter alia as under:-
The impugned order cannot be sustained in the eyes of law
as no reason for terminating their services has been given.
The same is arbitrary inasmuch as persons junior to the
petitioners are still continuing in service and the respondents have
adopted pick and choose policy while retaining them in service.
It is evident from the reply itself that the respondents are
replacing the petitioners by similar set of employees through a
different placement agency by the name of REXCO and that they
have not followed the policy of last come first go.
Further, the posts on which the petitioners were working
have not been abolished till date. The ratio of the non-teaching
staff should be to the tune of 3:1. Since the cadre of permanent
teaching staff of the respondents is more than 120, the number of
non-teaching post staff should be somewhere between 300 to 350. There is no reason to discontinue the services of the 150 out
of 455 non teaching employees.
The petitioners are working since last 3 to 9 years. It is
further stated that the Committee formed by the Department of
Technical Education had submitted its report on 22.07.2013
whereby it was recommended that the employees who have
completed the services of 08 years or more and were eligible as
per their qualification and experience for the post, they should be
regularised but instead of regularisation, their services have been
terminated without any ground or reason.
Reply has been filed. As per the reply, "there were 445 non- teaching staff working in the answering respondents college and
there are only about 3500 students. There is annual intake of 634
students in the academic year 2016-17 only. There are 117 seats
left vacant and the answering respondent college is running only 8
batches out of 10 batches. The answering respondent college is
self financed institution. The building of the answering respondent
college is 10 years old and requires renovation. There are 60 to 70
laboratories which also require upgradation. The total income of
the answering respondent no.2 & 3 is received by way of fee paid
by the students and annual receipts of the answering respondent
no.2 & 3 for year 2015-16 were to the tune of Rs.19 crores. Out of
total income of Rs.19 crores, approx. Rs.15.50 crores were spent
in payment of salary to the teaching and non-teaching staff and
approximately Rs.2 Crores was expenditure for basic amenities
like light, water etc. Only an amount of Rs.60 to 70 lakh was
spent by the answering respondent No.2 and 3 for providing
adequate infrastructure and facilities to the students. Now, the
strength of students has also decreased as two institute of
polytechnic and ITI has been closed. Financial position of the
answering respondent No.2 and 3 for this year is such that not a
single penny is available with the management to take care of
interest of the students and institution." The answering respondent
No.2 and 3 are under obligation to implement CAS for this year,
which would increase the expenditure to the extent of 10% of
salary. The respondents have also placed on record Annex.R-2 &
3/1 which is the copy of income and expenditure account of the
answering respondent No.2 & 3 which reveals that in the past,
approximate 80% of annual receipt was spent for salary and due
to low intake of new students, closure of two institutions, the
expenditure in salary is going to be 90% of annual receipt.
However, taking into account the arguments raised by the
learned counsel for the petitioners that the stand of the
respondents was contradictory inasmuch as they have specifically
stated in their reply that answering respondent was in fact
required to take services of non-teaching manpower through
placement agency on need analysis basis and they are likely to
replace them through placement agency REXCO as well as taking
into account the argument that juniors have been retained, this
Court vide order dated 30.01.2017 directed the respondents to file
affidavit explaining the same.
The additional affidavit has been filed. It is specifically stated
in the additional affidavit that out of 171 non-teaching employees,
only 21 persons have been retained who are only the drivers and
technical staff and are needed and having more qualification than
the petitioners. This Court may also notice that out of 171 non
teaching employees, only 81 have challenged the order of
termination. Moreover, learned counsel for the answering
respondents stated at bar that the respondents are not and shall
not keep any person on contractual basis or through the
placement agency. As and when their financial position is stable,
according to staffing pattern available with them, at the given
time, they shall employ the non-teaching staff only through the
regular selection as also as and when the posts are advertised for
regular appointment, the petitioners will be duly considered and
preference will be given to them. It is further stated that
relaxation in age shall be given to those who are overage by
computing the number of years of experience in accordance with
law.
It is a well settled proposition of law that the contractual
employees cannot claim continuation in service unless and until
they are being replaced by similar set of employees. Therefore, in
view of the undertaking given by the learned counsel for the
answering respondents after taking instruction from respondent
No.3, this Court need not to go into the disputed question as to
the staffing pattern available with the respondent institution.
Suffice it to say that the respondents shall not replace the
petitioners by similarly set of employees and they will be bound by
the statement made before this Court by the learned counsel for
the respondents that as and when the respondent decides to fill
the posts from regular selection process, the petitioners will be
duly given the preference and also age relaxation as stated before
this Court.
The writ petitions are disposed of with the above
observations.