Service Law – Lien Vacancy – Appointment not confirmed – Appellant was expecting her regularization since there was nothing adverse in her performance – In the 32nd Meeting of the Executive Council held on 13.12.2018, vide Agenda 18/32/2018, while other teachers working in their respective posts were confirmed, the appellant was not confirmed and the Executive Council resolved to re-advertise the post – Propriety: Held: The Appellant went through the normal process of selection – The employment notice set out that appointments made to the posts against LIEN vacancies are likely to be regularized subject to vacation of lien and satisfactory performance – The lien admittedly got vacated – The performance has been satisfactory as nothing adverse had been pointed out and the Appellant is discharging the duties for more than seven years – While approving the panel of names also it was clearly mentioned that in case the candidate at Serial No.1 did not accept the offer, the Appellant was to be accommodated against the regular vacancy – This clearly demonstrates that all the applicants competed for the regular post also and no one from the open market could have been prejudiced – Most importantly, the offer of appointment also stated that in case the lien was vacated, the Appellant’s service was to be continued further with the approval of the Executive Council of the University – In this background, the University was not justified in denying her confirmation when all the contingencies were cleared with the vacation of the lien and the performance being satisfactory – The Respondent-University, being a statutory body, any such conduct would tantamount to an arbitrary and unreasonable exercise of power, apart from being unfair – The discretion vested in the Executive Council should be exercised in a fair and non-arbitrary manner – The representations in the employment notice, the Resolution of the Executive Council and the appointment order did give rise to a legitimate expectation to the Appellant that in the event of the lien being vacated, the appellant would be continued in service and regularized in the said post – The only condition was that it will need the approval of the Executive Council – Thus, the Resolution in Agenda No.18/32/2018 of the 32nd Meeting of the Executive Council held on 13.12.2018 insofar as it records that the Appellant is not confirmed in service and that the post should be re-advertised is set aside. [Paras 26, 27, 31]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Ankit Gyan. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.