New Delhi: The Supreme Court has deprecated the practice of State Governments appointing teachers on an ad hoc basis in higher educational institutions, particularly in universities.

"If a government of a State or a university, which is also a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution, despite repeated observations of the superior courts continues to do so, such a practice must be condemned," said a Bench consisting of Justices S.B. Sinha and Markandey Katju.

Pointing out that in some universities ad hoc teachers were appointed at the instance of/or without reference to the Vice-Chancellor and even without any sanction therefor, the Bench said such appointments were good neither for universities nor students.

"It is now a well-settled principle of law that any appointment made in violation of the constitutional scheme of equality as adumbrated under Article 14 [equality before law] as also in violation of the provisions of the [relevant] Act and the subordinate legislation framed thereunder would be wholly illegal and without jurisdiction."

In the instant case, ad hoc teachers were appointed in various colleges affiliated to the Veer Kunwar Singh University in Bihar. At the time of the appointment, additional posts were not sanctioned. The University Ad hoc Teachers Association unsuccessfully moved the Patna High Court for regularisation of their services. The court also rejected a plea seeking review of the order.

In accordance

Dismissing the appeal against the November 23, 2000 judgment, the Bench said: "It has been conceded that many teachers have been appointed on an ad hoc basis in non-sanctioned posts. We fail to understand how this could be validly done. Those teachers who could compete with others having the requisite qualification must be appointed by the University Service Commission in accordance with the provisions of the Bihar State Universities Act."

The Bench said, "It may be that ad hoc teachers have been working for 20 years or more, but it is also beyond dispute that they have been doing so pursuant to orders passed by this court or by the High Court from time to time. But for the orders of the superior courts, their services would have been terminated by the university."

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail