In a landmark ruling, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the binding nature of University Grants Commission (UGC) regulations on universities, directing the reinstatement of teachers at Jamia Milia Islamia on a permanent basis. This decision comes after the university denied regularization to teachers despite UGC directives.
The bench, comprising Justices Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal, emphasized that teachers appointed through a proper selection process, meeting UGC-prescribed qualifications, should have been continued in their roles instead of subjecting them to a fresh selection procedure. The court deemed the university’s actions as unjust and arbitrary, violating constitutional principles.
The appellants, who were denied permanent appointments, had sought recourse after the university opted for a new selection process instead of regularizing their positions as per UGC guidelines. Despite the university’s argument against the binding nature of UGC directives, the court cited precedent, asserting UGC’s statutory authority over universities.
Drawing from the case of Kalyani Mathivanan v. K.V. Jeyaraj and others, the court underscored the obligatory nature of UGC regulations on universities. Despite the discretionary language used in UGC communications, the court maintained that universities are obligated to comply with UGC recommendations.
In a verdict favoring the appellants, the court ordered their reinstatement within three months, emphasizing continuity of service and consequential benefits. However, the ruling clarified that the appellants would not be entitled to pay and allowances for periods of non-service.
The ruling, in the case of Meher Fatima Hussain versus Jamia Milia Islamia & Ors., serves as a precedent, reinforcing the supremacy of UGC regulations in university matters.
Loading...
Reload document 
Open in new tab 
