1994 JTR(SC) 404
1995 Supp4 SCC 111 ; 1996 SCC(L&S) 168 ; 2000 1 SCT 876 ; 1999 8 SLR 361
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.M.Ahmadi : B.L.Hansaria : R.M.Sahai
Baseruddin M.Madari
Versus
State Of Karnataka
Case No. : 2277 , 2288 of 1994
Date of Decision : 4/4/94
When the employment mechanism and facts are identical to a previously decided case, the relief granted should be applied consistently, regardless of whether the employer is a university or a private college.
Act
Referred
:CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
: Art.14
(A) Service Law - Regularization of stop-gap lecturers - Parity in treatment - Where the subject-matter of litigation is identical to a previously decided case and the modus operandi of employment is the same, the difference in the management of the institutions, whether they are universities or private colleges, should make no difference - A decision in a similar matter applies on all fours to the facts of the present case. (Para 2)
(B) Reservation - If provisions exist for reservation for SC, ST, and OBC, the respondents must indicate the slots and, if necessary, create additional posts to accommodate the petitioners if there is a shortage of posts due to such reservations. (Para 3)
Facts of the case:
The appellants, who served as stop-gap lecturers, sought regularization of their services. They relied on a previous judgment involving stop-gap lecturers in private colleges, contending that their situation was identical despite being employed by a university rather than a private college.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the difference in the management of the institutions did not distinguish the present case from the previous precedent. Accordingly, the services of the appellants who worked for three years, including breaks, shall not be terminated and they shall be absorbed in regular vacancies as they arise. They are entitled to salary admissible to teachers appointed on a regular basis and shall be treated as continuing during vacations.
Issues: Whether the relief granted to stop-gap lecturers in private colleges could be extended to stop-gap lecturers in a university when the employment conditions and modus operandi were identical.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that when the method of employment is the same, the nature of the institution's management is irrelevant, and the legal precedent governing similar facts must be applied consistently.
Result: Appeals allowed.
(B) Reservation - If provisions exist for reservation for SC, ST, and OBC, the respondents must indicate the slots and, if necessary, create additional posts to accommodate the petitioners if there is a shortage of posts due to such reservations. (Para 3)
Facts of the case:
The appellants, who served as stop-gap lecturers, sought regularization of their services. They relied on a previous judgment involving stop-gap lecturers in private colleges, contending that their situation was identical despite being employed by a university rather than a private college.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the difference in the management of the institutions did not distinguish the present case from the previous precedent. Accordingly, the services of the appellants who worked for three years, including breaks, shall not be terminated and they shall be absorbed in regular vacancies as they arise. They are entitled to salary admissible to teachers appointed on a regular basis and shall be treated as continuing during vacations.
Issues: Whether the relief granted to stop-gap lecturers in private colleges could be extended to stop-gap lecturers in a university when the employment conditions and modus operandi were identical.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that when the method of employment is the same, the nature of the institution's management is irrelevant, and the legal precedent governing similar facts must be applied consistently.
Result: Appeals allowed.
Absorption - The court held that the decision in this case applies on all fours to the present matter as the subject-matter is identical.
(1) SPECIAL leave granted.
(2) THE learned counsel for the appellants points out that the subject-matter of the present litigation is identical to the one in Writ Petition (C) No. 873 of 1990 and allied matters which came to be disposed of by this court on 29/1/1992 in ( Karnataka State Private College Stop-Gap Lecturers Assn. v. State of Karnataka . The learned counsel for the respondents was not able to point out any distinguishing feature except that in the instant matter the institution concerned is the University whereas in the case relied on they were private colleges; the modus operandi, however, being the same. The difference in the management of the institutions should make no difference. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the decision relied on applies on all fours to the facts of the present case and we must pass an order on the same terms on which the court disposed of the earlier matters. We, therefore, allow these appeals and direct as under: (
1 Services of the petitioners/appellants who have worked for three years, including the break till today shall not be terminated and they shall be absorbed in regular vacancies as and when they arise.
(2 In the case of Appellant 5 who has since left service, regular appointment has been made and that shall not be disturbed.
The petitioners/appellants other than No. 5 shall be paid salary as is admissible to a teacher appointed on regular basis against a permanent post. They shall also be treated as continuing during vacation and be paid salary accordingly.
(3) IF there is a provision as to reservation for SC, ST. OBC the respondents will indicate the slot for them and if necessary create additional posts for the petitioners herein, if there is a shortage of post on account of reservation for SC, ST, OBC candidates.
(4) THERE will be no order as to costs.
(5) NO order on the application for impleading party.