Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

11. Prabhakar Ramakrishna Jodh v. A.L. Pande and Anr. , is a case where the question directly arose whether teachers' pay scales and security of tenure come within the statutory power of the University of Saugar or relate to contractual relationship. The appellant therein was a teacher in an affiliated college managed by the governing body established under Clause 3 of the "College Code" which is an ordinance made under the provisions of the University of Saugar Act. The Principal of the college served the appellant a charge-sheet and asked him to submit his explanation. The appellant denied all the charges and requested the particulars on which one of the charges was based. The appellant alleged that particulars were not supplied and the governing body terminated his services without holding any enquiry. Thereafter, the appellant moved the High Court for a writ of certiorari quashing the order of the governing body also for his reinstatement on the ground that the governing body discharged him from service in violation of the provisions of the College Code, The High Court rejected the contention of the appellant on the ground that the conditions of service of the appellant were governed not by the College Code, but by the contract between the governing body and the appellant and that no legal rights accrued to him under the College Code. On appeal by Special leave, the Supreme Court held that the view of the High Court was erraneous; that the provisions of the College Code have the force of law and that the provisions relating to the pay scales of teachers and the security of tenure properly fall within the statutory power of affiliation granted to the University under the Act. The learned Judges were not prepared to entertain the question raised before them that the governing body of the college was not a statutory body performing public duties and no writ in the nature of mandamus can be issued against the governing body on the ground that "on behalf of the respondent it was conceded that these objections were not pressed before the High Court. We are, therefore, unable to entertain these preliminary arguments at this stage and they must be overruled.'' It is, therefore, clear that, on the basis that the governing body was a statutory body performing public duties. Therefore, the question whether it was a statutory body performing public duties was not considered.