Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The petitioner University filed their reply. It was contended therein that when the University required the employees on permanent basis they have to send a proposal to the State Government and unless the Government sanctions the post no permanent appointment can be made. There are restrictions imposed on the petitioners by Section 8 of the Maharashtra University Act, 1994. In order to meet contingencies and with a view to complete the examination process and the allied work incidental thereto within the restricted period, the petitioner had to employ some employees on ad hoc basis. Such appointments are required to be made and the Management Council of the University under its authority fill in these posts on temporary basis. It is set out that the Standard Code is applicable to the non-teaching employees and the University is following the procedure of recruitment of the ad hoc staff as per the Standard Code and makes appointment of these ad hoc employees. It is then set out that the regular recruitment procedure is also there in the Standard Code Rule 1984 for Non-teaching staff of Class III employees. The respondent No. 1, it was contended, was not appointed in terms of Rule 3(III)(b)(1) as prescribed under Standard Code which are applicable for recruiting regular employees.