“Appellant Cannot Be Allowed to Suffer”: Supreme Court Invokes Article 142 to Reinstate Lecturer
August 28, 2023 — In a landmark decision that underscores the judiciary’s role in “doing substantial justice,” the Supreme Court of India invoked Article 142 of the Constitution to reinstate a lecturer who had been embroiled in an employment dispute for years. The bench, consisting of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol, declared, “Even assuming that there was an error committed by the College Management…the appellant cannot be allowed to suffer.”
Background
The case centered around the appointment of a lecturer in English. The appellant was initially appointed in the open category, while the fifth respondent was appointed in the Scheduled Caste category. Both had applied for the open category, and the dispute arose over who should have been rightfully appointed based on the order of merit.
Key Observations
– “The appellant was a regularly appointed candidate and therefore, her appointment on a full-time basis cannot be disturbed,” observed the Court, highlighting the appellant’s qualifications, including a PhD, which exempted her from the NET requirement.
– The Court noted that the fifth respondent did not object to the appellant’s appointment initially but later contended her seniority based on the first advertisement. “The fifth respondent never made any protest about her appointment against the post reserved for the Scheduled Caste category,” the judgment read.
– The Tribunal and High Court had earlier decisions that led to the appellant’s role being reduced to a part-time position. The Supreme Court found these decisions to be lacking in consideration for the appellant’s career, stating, “In this process, the appellant has become age-barred to get the appointment to the post of lecturer elsewhere.”
The Decision
Invoking its powers under Article 142, the Supreme Court directed the reinstatement of the appellant as a full-time lecturer, effective from January 5, 1995. “For doing substantial justice, this is a fit case where we should invoke our power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India for continuing her appointment on a full-time basis,” the Court declared.
The State Government was also directed to release the necessary grant-in-aid for the appellant’s salary, ensuring that the fifth respondent’s status remains unaffected.
Date of Decision: August 28, 2023
Vijaya Bhiku Kadam vs Mayani Bhag Shikshan Prasarak Mandal & Ors.
