Uttarakhand High Court
9Th November vs University Grants Commission & Another on 19 November, 2024
Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
2024:UHC:8575-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE SRI MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI
AND
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE VIVEK BHARTI SHARMA
WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO. 195 OF 2021
19TH NOVEMBER, 2024
Ankit Krishnatri ...... Petitioner
Versus
University Grants Commission & another
...... Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO. 196 OF 2021
Vijay Pratap Singh ...... Petitioner
Versus
University Grants Commission & another
...... Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO. 197 OF 2021
Pankaj Dutt Kaushik ...... Petitioner
Versus
University Grants Commission & another
...... Respondents
1
2024:UHC:8575-DB
WITH
WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO. 202 OF 2021
Rajesh Kumar Pandey ...... Petitioner
Versus
University Grants Commission & another
...... Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION (S/B) NO. 451 OF 2021
Pankaj Dutt Kaushik & others ...... Petitioners
Versus
University Grants Commission & another
...... Respondents
Counsel for the petitioners : Ms. Priyanka Agrawal, learned
counsel
Counsel for the respondents : Ms. Anjali Bhargava, learned counsel
for respondent No. 1
: Mr. Lochan Sah, learned counsel
holding brief of Mr. Aditya Singh,
learned counsel for respondent No.2
The Court made the following:
JUDGMENT:
(per Hon'ble The Acting Chief Justice Sri Manoj Kumar Tiwari)
Petitioners in the aforementioned writ petitions
were appointed on contract to different teaching / non-
2024:UHC:8575-DB
teaching positions in Gurukula Kangri Vishwavidyalaya
(Deemed to be University), Haridwar.
2) Since common questions of law and facts are
involved in all these writ petitions, therefore, they are
being heard and decided together. However, for the sake
of brevity facts of Writ Petition (S/B) No. 195 of 2021,
alone has been considered and discussed.
3) Petitioner Ankit Krishnatri has filed WPSB No.
195 of 2021, seeking the following reliefs :
"(i) To issue a writ, order or direction in the
nature of mandamus directing respondent No. 2 to
grant the minimum of pay scale on the post of
Assistant from the date of his initial appointment, and
(ii) To issue a writ, order or direction in nature of
mandamus directing respondent no. 2 to consider the
case of the petitioner for regularization of his service
on the post of Assistant."
4) Ms. Anjali Bhargava, learned counsel appearing
for University Grants Commission makes a statement at
the Bar that all the petitioners, including Ankit Krishnatri,
is being paid minimum of pay scale, therefore, she
submits that prayer made in relief clause no. (i) do not
survive any longer.
2024:UHC:8575-DB
5) Ms. Bhargava further submits that there is no
provision for regularization of teaching / non-teaching
employees. She further submits that the post against
which petitioner was given contractual appointment was
advertised in the year 2021, however, petitioner has not
challenged the said advertisement in the writ petition.
She also submitted that petitioner has not indicated the
provision under which he is claiming regularization. She
submits that regularization can be claimed only under a
scheme or a statutory provision, and in the absence of
any scheme / statutory provision, the prayer for
regularization to the petitioner cannot be granted.
6) We find substance in the submissions made by
learned counsel for the University Grants Commission. In
the absence of any scheme / statutory provision, direction
for regularizing the services of petitioner cannot be
issued.
7) Ms. Priyanka Agrawal, learned counsel for the
petitioner, refers to an order passed by a co-ordinate
bench in Special Appeal No. 561 of 2017, and she submits
that in the said case, this Court directed the State
Government to formulate a scheme for regularization of
such employees, who have served on contract or daily
wage basis for ten years, or more.
2024:UHC:8575-DB
8) When a pointed query was put to her, as to
whether University Grants Commission was also party to
the said Special Appeal, her answer was in the negative.
Thus reliance by learned counsel for the petitioners on the
order passed in Special Appeal No. 561 of 2017 is of no
avail to the petitioner. Since there is no statutory
provision, as of now, for regularization of contractual
employees engaged by Gurukula Kangri Vishwavidyalaya
against teaching / non-teaching positions, therefore, the
prayer as made in relief clause no. (ii) cannot be granted.
Thus, there is no scope of interference in these writ
petitions.
9) All the writ petitions, accordingly, fail and are
dismissed. No orders as to cost.
__________________________
MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, A.C.J.
___________________
VIVEK BHARTI SHARMA, J.
Dt: 19TH NOVEMBER, 2024
Negi
HIMANSHU
NEGI
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH
2.5.4.20=bb3b60774012c1ef1dae20d13aaf116e73351fda
f6878326386908a7f90d5757, postalCode=263001,
st=UTTARAKHAND,
serialNumber=75BD9D0FB7F4A80990FC51A722A6BC552
D470EB4FD2F88DDF7C18DB2A1524A4D, cn=HIMANSHU 5
NEGI
Date: 2024.11.20 20:18:37 +05'30'
