KARNATAKA STATE PRIVAT~ COLLEGE STOP-GAP v. STATE OF KARNATAK)\ & Ors.

While deprecating direction by the !loverruiten(~ break service for a day or two and paying fixed salary to temporar{enlployees we must condemn the practice of management or.'riot making regular selection utmost wi.thin six months of occurrence of vacancy. Nor the helplessness of government can be appreciated as expressed m the counter .affidavit that rlespite orders the management continued with it. If the government could not take effective measure either by superseding the management or stopping grant-in-aid then either it was working-under pressure from Man agement of the private aided institutions or it was itself interested in continuing such unfortunate state of affairs. have been created because of doings of state itself, therefore, it should resolve it. One such method was adopted by the High Court' in individual . petitions filed by the teachers by directing the Director of Education to . hold selection. In pursuance of. Jtsc;'me of the teachers have been regular- ised; But substantial ~(still-refuain due to State's going back on iis agreement before the court by creating obstacles in implementation of the order. Many of th.em. who have faced selection and have secured higher marks and are in zone of selection are being denied the benefit because it is claimed that such regularisation would be contrary to reservati.;rt policy of the State. The policy is under chaUenge in another proceedings in the·· Court. Without entering into validity of the policy which according to petitioner results in cent per cent reservation we are of opinion that such practice should be put an end to, therefore, foUowing directions are neces sary to be issued: In either case the equitie~ c D E F G (I) Provision in clause 5 of one day's break in service is struck down as ultra vires. (2) Orders for payment of fixed salary to temporary teachers is declared invalid. But it shaU operate prospectively. A teacher appointed temporarily shall be paid the salary that is H admissible to any teacher appointed regularly. 404 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [19921 I S.C.R. A B (3) Any teacher appointed temporarily shall be continued till t~e purpose for which he has been appointed exhausts or if it is in waiting of regular selection then till such selection is made. (4) Managements shay take steps, whenever necessary, to fill up permanent vacancies in accordance with rules. Delay in filling up the vacancies shall not entitle the management or Director to terminate the services of temporary teachers except for adequate reasons. But it shall entitle the government to take such steps including superse~sion of management or stop ping grants-in-aid if permitted under law to compel the institu tions to comply with the rules. D C So far these petitioners and teachers similarly situated are concerned, it.cQ_uld not be disputed that many of those teachers who appeared for selection in' pursuance of the High Court order secured sufficiently high marks but they could not be regularised because the vacancies are said to be reserved. But what has been lost sight of is that petitioners are seeking regularisation on posts on which they have been working and not fresh appointments, therefore, they could not be~denied benefit of the High Court's order specially when no such difficulty was pointed out and it was on agreement by the respondents that the order was passed. No material has been brought on record to show that any action was taken prior-to decision by the High Court against any insti.tution for not following the .reservation policy. To deny therefore the benefit of selection held on E · agreement by the respondents is being unjust to such selectees. Further the State of Karnataka appears to have been regularising services of ad hoc teachers. Till now it has regularised 'services of contract lecturers, local candidates, University lecturers, Engineering colleges, lecturers etc. It may not furnish, any basis for petitioners to claim that the State may be directed to issue similar order regularising services of teachers of pri- F vately managed colleges. All the same such policy d~cisions of govern ment in favour of one or the .other set of employees of sister department are bound to raise hopes and expectations in employees of other depart ments. That is why it is incumbent on governments to be more circum spect in taking such decisions. The petitioners may not be able to build up any clfallenge on discrimination as employees of government colleges and private colleges may not belong to the same class yet their claim cannot be negatived on the respondents' stand in the counter affidavit that the regularisation of temporary teachers who have not faced selection shall impair educatonal standard without explaining the effect of regulari sation of temporary teachers of University and even technical colleges. Such being the unfortunate state of affairs this Court is left with no.option H · · bui to issue following directions to respondents for not honoring its com- G ) LECTURERS ASSOCIATON v. STATE [SAHA!, J.] 405 - -'y' mitments before the High court and acting contrary to the spirit of the A order, and also due to failure of government in remaining vigilant against private management of the college by issuing timely directions and taking effective steps for enforcing the rules: . _.,. (I) Services of such tel\lPorary teachers who have worked as such for three years, including the break till today shall not be tenni- nated. They shall be absorbed as and when regular vacancies arise. (2) If regular selections have been made the government shall create additional posts to accommodate such selected candidates . (3) The teachers who have undergone the process of selection under the directions of the High Court and ·have not been appointed ·because of the reservation policy of the Govemm·ent be regularly appointed·by creating additional posts. (4) From the date of judgment every temporary teachers shall be · paid salary as is admis~ible to teachers appointed against penna- nent post. (5) Such teachers shall be continued in service even during vaca- tions. For these reasons this petition succeeds and is allowed. The direc tion is issued to respondents in the terms indicated above. Civil Appeal Nos. 309-373 of 1992 arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos. 13131-95 of 1990 challenging the order of High Court in CMW 6232 of 1990 decided on 3rd July, 1990 is disposed of accordingly. B c D E Contempt Petition No. 6 of 1991 alleging violation of·status quo order granted in W.P. (Civil) No. 873 of 1990 need hot be decided. It is directed to be filed.· F . The petitioners shall be entitled to their cost from the State of Kamat aka. T.N.A. Petition allowed . .