2025:UHC:2948-DB IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL HON’BLE MR. MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI, J. HON’BLE MR. ASHISH NAITHANI, J SPECIAL APPEAL No.296 of 2018 Vice Chancellor, Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar and others …Appellants Versus Km. Manju Sharma & others …Respondents Counsel for the appellant Counsel for respondent : Mr. Shubhang Dobhal, learned counsel. Mr. Vinay Kumar, learned counsel. JUDGMENT : (PER HON’BLE MR. MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI. J) This intra court appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 26.03.2018, passed by learned Single Judge in WPSS No.523 of 2013. By the said judgment, the advertisement issued by Establishment Officer, Govind Ballabh Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, inviting applications for appointment as Teacher was set aside. Operative portion of the impugned judgment is reproduced below:- “Accordingly, the writ petition is allowed. The impugned advertisement dated 08.03.2013 is quashed and set aside. The respondent-University is directed to take steps to regularize the services of the petitioners by taking into consideration their length of service, within a period of 10 weeks from today. The petitioners shall not be shown any displeasure for approaching this Court. In other words, they would not be terminated in the meantime.” 1 2025:UHC:2948-DB 2. The impugned judgment is challenged by the appellant on the ground that no reasons has been indicated for setting aside the advertisement for regular selection on the post of Teacher. He submits that writ petitioners (respondents herein) were engaged on contract through service provider to discharge the duties as Teacher, and they were serving as such for several years. However, in the absence of any Rules/Scheme for Regularization, the writ petitioners (respondents herein) had no vested right of regularization. He submits that writ petitioners were engaged in a private Institution known as “Balniliyam Junior High School”, which is not receiving any financial aid from State or Central Government. However, the faculty members of G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology are members of the Committee of Management of the said school. He submits that process of regular selection initiated by the advertisement dated 01.03.2013 could not have been interfered with in the absence of any illegality in the advertisement. 3. This Court finds substance in the said submission, in the absence of any Scheme or Rule for regularization of services of Teachers in “Balniliyam Junior High School” writ petitioners had not vested right to be considered for regularization. The competent authority decided to fill the vacant positions of Teachers in the said school by regular selection and accordingly issued the advertisement. 4. It is not the case of writ petitioners that the advertisement is flawed or suffers from some 2 2025:UHC:2948-DB illegality. The contention of the writ petitioners was that their right to be considered for regularization was a superior right and without considering their case for regularization, the process of selection could not have been initiated. 5. Learned counsel for the appellant relied upon Regularization Rules framed by the State Government in respect of the State employees. Since the Teachers of “Balniliyam Junior High School” are neither State nor Government employees, therefore, the Regularization Rules relied upon by the writ petitioners in support of their claim are not attracted to the facts of the case. 6. The decision taken by the competent authority to hold regular selection for making the appointment against teaching posts cannot be said to be arbitrary or illegal. Thus, the interference made by learned Single Judge was not warranted. Moreover, no valid reasons have been assigned for interfering with the advertisement. 7. Thus, we allow the special appeal. The impugned judgment and order dated 26.03.2018 passed in Writ Petition (S/S) No.523 of 2013 is set aside. 8. Mr. Shubhang Dobhal, learned counsel appearing for the appellant fairly submitted that vacancy on the post of Teachers shall be re-advertised and any of the writ petitioners, who has crossed upper age limit during the interregnum will be given relaxation in upper age limit and his/her claim for regular appointment shall 3 2025:UHC:2948-DB be considered on merits. He further submits that bonus points shall also be given to the writ petitioners for their long services to the extent of one bonus marks for each completed year of service. 9. We dispose of the appeal by taking the statement made by Mr. Shubhang Dobhal, learned counsel for the appellant/University on record. MANOJ KUMAR TIWARI. J. ASHISH NAITHANI, J. Dt:23rd April, 2025 NR/ 4