Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

(6) I have heard learned counsel for the parties. The short question of taw which has been pressed before me is that the Iac was not justified in assuming that the services of the appellant were governed by rules and regulations of the school (copy Ex. Dw 10/9), and not by law or rules having the force of law. The Iac noticed the judgment of the Supreme Court in Prabhakar Ramakrishna Jodh v. A.L. Pande which laid down that the conditions of service of the appellant P.R. Jodh were governed by the provisions of Ordinance Xx, otherwise called the college Code, and that the said provisions had the force of law which conferred-legal rights on the teachers of affiliated colleges. The attention of the Iac was also drawn to a ruling of this Court in Civil Writ No. 146 of 1969, Shital Prasad Tyagi v. Principal Central Institute of Education which, relying on P R. Jodh'a case (supra) held that Ordinance Xii made under Section 28 of the Delhi University Act, 1922, governed the service conditions of the petitioner, and since action, against the petitioner was contrary to the Ordinance, it could not be allowed to stand and had to be quashed. After. having noticed the aforesaid rulings, the Iao observed ; "IT will thus be seen that in both the cases cited above, the aggrieved party succeeded, because he could show to the court that his conditions of service were governed by law rather than by private contract between the parties. The plaintiff in the instant case has not been able to bring his case within the ambit of any law or rules made there under. The plaintiff case was that his conditions of service were governed by the Punjab Education Code as amended and adapted by the Chief Commissioner of Delhi from time to time. There is nothing on the record to show that the alleged adaptation and enforcement of the Punjab Education Code in Delhi by the Chief Commissioner was done under the provisions of any enacted law. For instance, we know, the said code might have been issued by the- Punjab Government in the exercise of its executive powers. The Chief Commissioner of Delhi might have enforced the said: Code in Delhi in the exercise of similar powers. I am, therefore, not prepared to hold that the conditions of service of the- plaintiff are governed by any law or rules having the force of law."