Miss Lucy
← All judgments

Jacob.K.Daniel vs Mahatma Gandhi University

Supreme Court11 May 2022Sudhanshu Dhulia · S. Ravindra Bhat · Uday Umesh Lalit

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where an academic institution issues an appointment letter to a candidate for a specific post without any express notation of temporariness, coupled with subsequent actions such as protection of basic pay from a prior post and fixation of pay in the applicable scale, such circumstances collectively indicate the intent to create a permanent appointment rather than a temporary one, and the burden lies on the institution to establish the temporary nature of such appointment through clear documentary evidence.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

1

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL Nos.3887-3888 OF 2022 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.4255-4256 of 2018)

DR. JACOB K. DANIEL Appellant

VERSUS

MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS & ANR. Respondents

ORDER

1. These appeals challenge the judgment and order dated 20.11.2015 passed in

Writ Appeal No.339 of 2015; and order dated 20.09.2017 passed in Review Petition

No.3 of 2016 arising out of the disposal of Writ Appeal No.339 of 2015, by the High

Court of Kerala at Ernakulam.

2. The Special Leave Petitions from which the instant appeals arise were initially

listed with batch of petitions [i.e. SLP (C) Nos.4251-4252 of 2018] filed by the

teaching staff of Mahatma Gandhi University questioning the judgment and orders

which are presently under challenge.

Signature Not Verified

3. Digitally signed by Dr. The appeals filed by other members of the teaching staff were allowed and the Mukesh Nasa Date: 2022.05.14 15:17:09 IST Reason:

judgment and orders under appeal were set-aside and the order dated 08.01.2014

passed by the Single Judge was restored. The matter concerning the instant appellant 2

was however segregated as some of the documents were found to indicate that the

appointment of the appellant was temporary. The matter was therefore directed to be

listed in due course.

4. We have heard Ms. Praseena Elizabeth Joseph, learned Advocate in support of

the appeals and Mr. Sidharth Luthra, learned Senior Advocate for the University.

5. Learned counsel for the appellant invited our attention to the Notification dated

15.07.1996 inviting applications from the qualified candidates for filling up inter alia

post of Lecturer in Mathematics in the Pay Scale of Rs.2200-4000/-. The appellant

who was then working as a Senior Lecturer in Pondicherry Engineering College

offered his candidature and he was selected. The appointment letter issued to the

appellant was as under:

“With reference to his/her application for the post of Lecturer in the College of Engineering, Thodupuzha, under School of Technology and Applied Sciences of the University, Sri Dr. Jacob K. Daniel is informed that he has been selected for appointment as Lecturer in Mathematics in the scale of Rs.2,200 - 4,000 /-. He is therefore, directed to report for duty before the Director, School of Technology and Applied Sciences forthwith along with a Medical Certificate of fitness as required in Rule-13 Part I Kerala Services Rules obtained from a Medical Officer not below the rank of Assistant Surgeon in a Government Hospital.

He is informed that his appointment in the University will be governed by the provisions in Mahatma Gandhi University First Statutes, 1991.”

6. Thereafter, at the request of the appellant, the matter was considered by the

University for protecting his basic pay which he was drawing as a Senior Lecturer in

Pondicherry Engineering College. By communication dated 31.07.1998, the pay of

the appellant was fixed at Rs.3500/- in same pay scale.

3

7. All these developments are indicative that the appointment of the appellant was

not on any temporary basis but it was a permanent appointment in the University.

8. We, therefore, allow these appeals on same terms as indicated in our judgment

and order dated 28.02.2019 passed in Abdul Hakeem M.A. & Others v. Mahatma

Gandhi University & Others, Civil Appeal Nos.4251-4252 of 2018, reported in (2019)

16 SCC 328.

9. Since the appellant has retired, all the retiral and pensionary benefits shall be

computed on the basis that he was in permanent employment of the University and all

the dues shall be made over to the appellant within eight weeks from today.

10. These appeals are accordingly allowed, with no order as to costs.

……..............................J. (UDAY UMESH LALIT)

……..............................J. (S. RAVINDRA BHAT)

…….............................J. (SUDHANSHU DHULIA) New Delhi, May 11, 2022

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free