AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K.M. JOSEPH, C.J. (Oral)
SHARAD KUMAR SHARMA, J.
The prayers sought in the Writ Petition are as follows:
“(i) A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to appoint/absorb/adjust the petitioner as Lecturer/Assistant
Professor Commerce according to G.O. dated 20.06.2016.
(ii) A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to grant the all consequential benefits including salary, seniority
and other benefits from the date of  absorption/ appointment/adjustment of other Lecturers/Assistant Professors.
(iii) A writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent to decide the representation of the petitioner dated 23.04.2018
expeditiously within one month.â€
Heard Mr. Ghanshyam Joshi, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Vikas Pande, Standing Counsel on behalf of the State/respondents.
The case of the petitioner is that the petitioner, who is teaching as Assistant Professor since 16.08.2011 has not being absorbed. The petitioner
pointed out the case of the allegedly similarly situated person (Dr. Neelam Kanwal), though in a different subject. She too was working prior to
provincialisation of the College on the same conditions has already been absorbed. Petitioner has been continuously discharging her duties, according
to her, since 2011 and she fulfills all the required qualifications for absorption in view of the Government Orders dated 20.06.2016,16.12.2016 &
03.01.2017, but still she has been discriminated and had not been granted regular status. Raising her claim the petitioner has already represented her
grievance by Annexure-12 before respondent no. 2, on which no decision has been taken yet, which necessitated filing of this Writ Petition.
After hearing the parties, we are of the view that a decision should have been taken on the representation of the petitioner by respondent no. 2.
Accordingly, we dispose of the Writ Petition by directing respondent no. 2 to consider and take a decision on Annexure-12 in accordance with law and
also take into consideration the order dated 12.03.2018, within a period of six weeks from the date of production of the certified copy of this judgment.
However, it is clarified that we have not made any expression regarding the merits of the petitioner’s case. We make it clear that this will be
without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to approach this Court seeking the relief if need arises, except the relief which we have already granted.
Writ Petition would stand disposed of subject to above directions.
However, there would be no order as to cost.