B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.
This petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution, prays for following substantial reliefs by issuing writ of mandamus against the respondents No. 1 to 4:
(A) To make the rule in respect of determination of seniority of the Principals of different Colleges run by the same management affiliated to respondent No. 3 University, in accordance with the provisions of section 77-A of the Marathwada University Act, 1974;
(B) To shift the petitioner is a Principal of any one of the Colleges run by the respondent No. 4, of which the strength of the students as on 31st December, 1988 was more than 1000 and to pay the salary in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-150-5700-200-6300/- with effect from 1-1-1986.
(C) To make the Statute in respect of determination of seniority of the Principals of different colleges run by the same management affiliated to respondent No.3 University in accordance with the provisions of section 37 of the Marathwada University Act, 1974; and
(D) To make payment of the arrears payable to the petitioner
Please Login To View The Full Judgment!
with effect from 1-1-1986 treating the petitioner as a Principal of a college of which the strength of the students was more than 1000 on 31st December, 1988 with effect from 1-1-1986.
2.The petitioner, on completion of his M.A. (Marathi) degree in 1967, came to be appointed as a Lecturer under Shri Chhatrapati Shivaji College, Omerga and he continued there till 1971. He then joined Deogiri college at Aurangabad run by the respondent No.4 society. He served as Head of the Department of the said college till 8th August, 1974 and was thereafter appointed as Principal of Muktanand College, Gangapur, run by the respondent No. 4, vide order dated 5th August, 1974. For a short duration in between, he was posted as Officer of the respondent No.4 Society at Aurangabad. On 5th August, 1991, he came to be appointed as Principal of Arts & Commerce College at Kille Dharur in Beed District by the respondent No.4. When he approached this Court, he was working in the same post and has retired from service on reaching the age of superannuation on 21-12-2001.
3.The petitioner relies upon the Resolution dated 27th February, 1985 issued by the Government of Maharashtra and claims that he ought to have been transferred as a Principal by the respondent No. 4 society to any of its colleges which were having the strength of 1000 students or more so that he could have been placed in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-150-5700-200-6300/-. The placement in such a pay scale was based on seniority and the respondent No.4, at the relevant time, was running 9 colleges, out of which 7 were higher strength students colleges. Considering this position, he ought to have been placed, at any time, in one of these 7 colleges so that he could have got benefit of the said higher pay scale as against the pay scale of Rs. 3700-125-4950-150-5700/-, which he was drawing at the relevant time. He submitted a representation to this effect on 6-12-1989 as well as on 11-4-1991. As the respondent No. 4 Management did not consider his representation favourably, he approached this Court.
4.As the petitioner has retired from service, the only issue which is required to be considered in this petition, at this stage, is whether the petitioner ought to have been shifted as a Principal by the respondent No. 4 to any of its colleges which had a strength beyond 1000 students so that he could have been placed in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-150-5700-200-6300/- and consequently got the payment of arrears. The issue of drawing seniority for the post of Principal in respect of the colleges under respondent No. 4 does not appear to be germane at this stage specially when the petitioner has already been superannuated.
5.Though no relief has been sought against respondent No. 5 nor the petitioner has prayed for his posting in place of the said respondent, it would be necessary to mention that the said respondent came to be appointed initially as Lecturer in Physics at Deogiri College on 19th June, 1961. Subsequently, he was transferred to Shri Shivaji College at Parbhani and became the Head of the Department in the said college in 1971. He came to be transferred as Principal of Arts, Science and Commerce College at Majalgaon run by the respondent No. 4 and he worked in that post from 1-6-1971 to 19-6-1975. He was then transferred back to Shri Shivaji College at Parbhani as Head of Department in Physics in September 1975 and in August 1982, he was given additional charge of the post of Principal Shri Shivaji institute of Pharmacy at Parbhani, which post he occupied for about six years and the said Institute is also run by the respondent No. 4. In June 1986, he came to be appointed as Incharge Principal of Shri ShivaJi College at Parbhani, which post he occupied till May 1987. The respondent No. 4 initiated action to fill in the post of Principal of Shri Shivaji College as per Statute 219-A(2)(a) framed under the Marathwada University Act, 1974 and an advertisement was released on All India basis. The respondent No. 5 was one of the candidates who responded to the advertisement and the petitioner did not. The competent Selection Committee, considering the credentials of the respondent No. 5, as framed under Ordinance No. O. 16-B(ii) under the Marathwada University Act, 1974 and the strength of the students of the college at that time, selected him for the said post and he assumed charge of the same on 8th June,1987. His appointment was approved by the Vice Chancellor of the respondent No. 3-University and also the pay scale of Rs. 1500-2500/- (unrevised senior scale).
6.Coming to the issue of the pay scales, as applicable to the post of Principal, it requires to be noted that the Government of Maharashtra, vide Resolution dated 25th October, 1977, had prescribed two different pay scales for the said post viz. Rs. 1200 to 1900/- and Rs. 1500 to 2500/- effective from 1-1-1973. It was clarified that the Principal of college having the strength of more than 1000 students would be placed in the pay scale of Rs. 1500-2500/ - where as the Principal of a college having the strength upto 1000 students shall be given the pay scale of Rs. 1200-1900/-. Some doubts arose while implementing this Resolution and, therefore, the Government of Maharashtra issued yet another Resolution on 24th June, 1980 and laid down that:
(a) For calculating the strength of students both Junior College as well as Senior College being run by the same college would be taken into consideration provided the students strength in the degree classes would be minimum 300.
(b) The pay scale to the post of Principal will be decided on the basis of the stablised strength of students as on 31-12-1979 and would be taken as the basis.
(c) The pay scale so determined will continue for a period of 5 years ending on 31-12-1985.
(d) In the case of enrolment of any particular college fell below 1000, the Management should shift, as far as possible, the Principal to other college run by it and having enrolment over 1000 so as to fix them in the higher pay scale appropriate to their overall seniority vis-a-vis their colleagues. In case, this was not possible, the pay of the Principal, who was working in the post carrying the higher pay scale of Rs. 1500-2500/- should be refixed in the lower pay scale of Rs. 1200-1900/- after giving him the benefit of the service rendered by him in the said post.
7.The Director of Education, Maharashtra State, Pune, addressed a letter to the Officers on Special Duty (Higher Education) on 6-3-1981 and called upon for follow up action for assigning the appropriate pay scales to the post of Principal of all aided private colleges. He stated that placement in the post of Principal should be done on the basis of seniority and other criterion and the senior most Principal should be held eligible for the higher pay scale of Rs.1500-2500/- and should be posted in a college with more than 1000 students. However, he further clarified that the said issue of granting higher pay scale was a matter to be decided by the employer and therefore, it ought to be left to the College Management.
8.The Resolution dated 27th February, 1989, which has been relied upon by the petitioner, created 3 pay scales for the post of Principal, viz.:
01.1000 or lessRs. 3700-125-4950-150-5700/-
02.1001-3999Rs. 4500- 150-5700-200-6300/-
03.4000 and aboveRs. 4500-150-5700-200-7300/-
While prescribing the revised pay scales as well as the changed norms of students strength, the Government maintained the same guidelines for offering the pay scale as well, set out in the Government Resolution dated 24-6-1980 and, therefore, the revised pay scales were also to be given on the basis of the stablised strength of the students.
9.The petitioner contends that his grievance arose for the first time when the respondent No. 4 was required to implement the Government Resolution dated 27th February, 1989 and by taking seniority as the basic Principle for offering the senior pay scale, he ought to have been shifted to one of the 7 colleges where students strength was more than 1000, by the respondent No.4.
10.Nothing has been brought before us showing that the petitioner has such a vested right. The Government Resolutions dated 25th October, 1977, 24th June, 1980 as well as 27th February, 1989 do not set any such right in favour of a particular Principal for he being placed in the senior time scale on the basis of his seniority alone. It is well recognised that the post of a Principal carries with it dual responsibilities of an eminent academician and effective administrator so as to provide a sound leadership. When it comes to occupy such a post in a college with the strength beyond 1000, the Management, running such a college, is required to assess the credentials of the incumbent so as to satisfy these requirements and seniority alone cannot be the basis for such an appointment. When the respondent No. 4 initiated action for filling in the post of a Principal of Shri Shivaji College at Parbhani, the petitioner did not apply for the same. His representations submitted to the respondent No. 4 and as referred to hereinabove, were without any support, either from the Government Resolutions or from any Rules, as framed by the University Grants Commission. It appears that the petitioner claimed that he had better credentials and he was amongst the first 3 senior most Principals working in the colleges run by the respondent No. 4 and, therefore, he ought to have been considered for his transfer to a college where he could have been placed in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-6300/-. As stated little while ago, such a right did not vest in the petitioner at any time during his tenure.
11.In the premises, the claim made in the petition is devoid of merits and the same consequently fails. Petition is, therefore, dismissed. Rule discharged. No costs