Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

23. It is submitted by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 that under Section 61(3) of the said University Act, powers is conferred on the State Government and University or both, for appointment for principals, teachers and other employees or affiliated colleges. It is submitted that under Section 9(3) of the said University Act, the State Government is empowered to prescribe a 'Standard Code' for the classification, manner and mode of selection and appointment, absorption of teachers and employees rendered surplus, reservation of posts in favour of members of Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and other backward classes, duties, workload, pay, allowances, post- retirement benefits, other conditions of service of the officers, teachers and other employees of the University etc. He submits that under Section 49(6), the Chancellor also has either suo motu powers or on the advice of the Government, may direct the University to make provisions in Statutes in respect of any matter specified by him.

44. Under Section 9(3) of the said University Act, the State Government is empowered to prescribe a standard Code in accordance with provisions contained in the said University Act for the purpose of securing and maintaining uniform standards by issuing notification in the Official Gazette, for the classification, manner and mode of selection and appointment, absorption of teachers and employees rendered surplus, reservation of posts in favour of members of the Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Tribes and Other WP 9662.17.odt Backward Classes, duties, workload, pay, allowances, post-retirement benefits, other benefits, etc. It is provided in the said provision that, when such Code is prescribed, the provisions made in the Code shall prevail and the provisions made in Statute, Ordinances, Regulations and Rules made under this Act for matters included in the Code shall to the extent to which they are inconsistent with the provisions of the code, be invalid.

57. The impugned letter dated 06th June, 2017 issued by the respondent No. 2 is consequential to the directions of the university and also consequential to various provisions of the statute and directions issued by the State of Maharashtra. In absence of any challenge to the provisions of the said University Act or the Statutes or the Directions issued by the Vice Chancellor from time to time, the said letter dated 06 th June, 2017 issued by the AYUSH cannot be challenged individually. The petitioner has also not challenged the power of the State Government U/Sec. 9(3) of the said University Act which prescribe a standard code providing for classification, manner and mode of selection and appointment, absorption of teachers and employees rendered surplus, reservation of posts, etc.