Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2012 DIGILAW 176 (HP)

Jai Shankar v. State Of Himachal Pradesh

2012-04-09

RAJIV SHARMA

body2012
JUDGMENT : Rajiv Sharma, J.—Petitioner submitted an application for considering his candidature for the post of Lecturer in the subject of Political Science in R.V.M.S.D. College, Sujanpur Tihra. He was interviewed on 4.8.1997. He was offered appointment letter on 19.8.1997. He joined his duties on 20.8.1997. R.V.M.S.D. College, Sujanpur Tihra was merged with D.A.V. College (Women), Sujanpur. Petitioner applied for the post of Lecturer (School Cadre) in the subject of Political Science. He was offered appointment on 8.5.2000. He submitted an application to the Principal, D.A.V. College on 17.5.2000 seeking relieving with effect from 17.5.2000 to enable him to join his assignment and also requested to grant extra ordinary leave for 16 months in order to get benefit of taking over of College as per announcements made by the Hon'ble Chief Minister. He has also given reference to the Ordinances of the University. Petitioner was relieved on 17.5.2000. He joined his duties as Lecturer (School Cadre) on 22.5.2000. Respondent-State has taken a decision to take over D.A.V. College, Sujanpur Tihra with effect from 7.3.2001. The other formalities were gone into vide letter dated 28.8.2001, including determining the terms and conditions for taking over the college and services of the teaching and non-teaching staff and creation of posts. 2. Mr. Sanjeev Bhushan has strenuously argued that the petitioner has submitted an application vide Annexure A-2 and since no decision has been taken on the same, the extraordinary leave will be deemed to have been granted to the petitioner and consequently his services were also required to be taken over as Lecturer (College Cadre) in the subject of Political Science as per notification dated 28.8.2001. 3. Mr. Rajinder Dogra, learned Additional Advocate General has vehemently argued that the petitioner was not in continuous service preceding one year at the time of taking over the College, i.e. 7.3.2001 and the petitioner was relieved and no extraordinary leave was sanctioned to him. 4. I have heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the pleadings carefully. 5. It is not in dispute that D.A.V. College Sujanpur Tihra has been taken over by the State Government with effect from 7.3.2001. Codal formalities were completed as per letter dated 28.8.2001. Petitioner submitted an application seeking his relieving and extraordinary leave vide Annexure A-2. I have heard the Learned Counsel for the parties and have perused the pleadings carefully. 5. It is not in dispute that D.A.V. College Sujanpur Tihra has been taken over by the State Government with effect from 7.3.2001. Codal formalities were completed as per letter dated 28.8.2001. Petitioner submitted an application seeking his relieving and extraordinary leave vide Annexure A-2. Petitioner has not placed any tangible material on record to show that the extraordinary leave applied by him under the Himachal Pradesh University Ordinances was sanctioned. There has to be express order to grant the extraordinary leave. The extraordinary leave in case of affiliated college is regulated under regulation 38 of the First Ordinances of the Himachal Pradesh University read with para 53 of Appendix 'A'. According to para 53, the management on the recommendation of the Principal for any special reasons can grant a teacher extraordinary leave but such leave shall be without pay and shall not exceed six months. It is not borne out from the records that the Principal has ever recommended the case of the petitioner to the management and the management has taken decision to grant extraordinary leave. The extraordinary leave in these circumstances is only for a period of six months though as per proviso to para 53, it could be granted upto the period of 16 months to a teacher who has taken up employment elsewhere with the permission of the management. There is no contemporaneous record to show that the petitioner has sought employment in the State Government with the prior permission of the management. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the petitioner's case is covered under para 53 of Appendix 'A'. The college has been taken over with effect from 7.3.2001 and on that date petitioner was not on the rolls of the D.A.V. College, Sujanpur. He was required to be in continuous service for a period of one preceding year before taking over the college. The petitioner has not been sanctioned any leave as per observations made hereinabove. In these circumstances, the case of the petitioner cannot be ordered to be considered for the post of Lecturer (College Cadre) in the subject of Political Science after taking over the College by the State Government. Annexure A-3 only talks of relieving of the petitioner from his duties on 17.5.2000 (A.N.) only. 6. In these circumstances, the case of the petitioner cannot be ordered to be considered for the post of Lecturer (College Cadre) in the subject of Political Science after taking over the College by the State Government. Annexure A-3 only talks of relieving of the petitioner from his duties on 17.5.2000 (A.N.) only. 6. Though the petitioner has made averment that representation was made vide Annexure A-5, but the copy of the same has not been placed on record. Accordingly/ in view of the observations and analysis made hereinabove, there is no merit in the petition and the same is dismissed. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.