H I G H C O U R T O F J A M M U & K A S H M I R A N D L A D A K H HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU Case No:-WP(C) No. 4262/2019 CM No. 2877/2025 Manjeet Singh, Age 33 years, S/o S. Sudhagar Singh, R/o H.No. 144, Digiana Camp, Gangyal, Jammu. …..Petitioner(s) Through: Mr. Anuj Sawhney, Advocate. Vs 1. Central University of Jammu, RahyaSuchani (Bagla), District Samba Th. Its Registrar; 2. Vice-Chancellor, Central University of Jammu, Suchani (Bagla), District Samba Th. Its Registrar; 3. Dean, School of Business Studies, Central University of Jammu, Suchani (Bagla), District Samba; 4. Head of Department, Department of Tourism and Travel Management, Central University of Jammu, Suchani (Bagla), District Samba; 5. Finance Officer, Central University of Jammu, Suchani (Bagla), District Samba; 6. Secretary, University Grants Commission (UGC), Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg, New Delhi. .…. Respondent(s) Through: Mr. D.C. Raina, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Govind Raina, Advocate for R-1 to 5. Mr. Sunny Mahajan, Advocate for R-6. Coram: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAVED IQBAL WANI, JUDGE ORDER(ORAL) 09.07.2025 1. The petitioner in the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for the following reliefs:- A. Certiorari seeking to quashCommunication/order No. CUJ/Dean /SBS/2019/142-149 Dated:- 4-11-2019issued by respondent no.3&4 (Annexure-I) by virtue of which the services ofPetitioner as Assistant Professor werere-designated as Guest faculty that to with retrospective effect after 30th ofJune,2019 and also reducing petitioner'ssalary from last drawn salary i.eRs.57,675/- per month to the maximumextent of ₹30,000/- as payable toGuest lecturers to the disadvantage of petitioner that too in an arbitrary, unfair and illegal manner; B. Any order, writ or direction in the natureof mandamus commanding therespondents not to replace or substitute the petitioner by any other temporaryappointee or by contractual Sr. No. 41 2 WP(C) No. 4262/2019 arrangementor by any other manner and also allow the Petitioner to continue his services as Assistant Professor, B. Voc (Tourism Management) in Department of Tourismand Travel Management, CentralUniversity of Jammu till the Posts werefilled by regular vacancy; as the petitioneris working as Assistant Professor for the last four years and grant himconsequential benefits including the comparative salary @ Rs 67,675/- per month as per UGC Guidelines; C. An appropriate writ, order or direction inthe nature of writ of mandamuscommanding the respondents to releasethe salary of the petitioner w.e.f. July,2019 to till date which has been illegallywithheld by the respondents and alsodirect them to grant extension to thepetitioner as Assistant Professor, B. Voc(Tourism Management) in Department ofTourism and Travel Management, CentralUniversity of Jammu till the Posts werefilled by regular vacancy and also directthem to continue paying the same to the petitioner regularly in future; D. Any other writ, order or direction whichthis Hon'ble Court may deem fit or properin the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. The background facts under the shade and cover of which the aforesaid reliefs have been prayed and as are stated in the instant petition are that the petitioner herein came to be engaged as Assistant Professor by the Central University of Jammu (for short, “CUJ’) on 17.09.2015 on contract basis against the consolidated salary of ₹53,736/- (Rupees Fifty-Three Thousand, Seven Hundred and Thirty-Six) per month, which engagement was extended upon satisfactory performance of the services by the petitioner from time to time and lastly in terms of order dated 31.10.2019 came to be extended w.e.f. 24.05.2019 upto 01.07.2019 on the existing terms and conditions set out in the initial appointment order. 3. It is being stated that after the expiry of the extension period provided in terms of order dated 31.10.2019, respondent 3 herein addressed a Communication bearing No. CUJ/Dean/SB/2019/142-149 dated 04.11.2019 to the petitioner, wherein it came to be stated that the University did not receive any financial allocation for meeting expenses on account of salary and other 3 WP(C) No. 4262/2019 heads for current financial year 2019-20, as such, the services of the petitioner cannot be continued as Assistant Professor after 30.06.2019 and that payment for the services rendered shall be met out of the available funds with the University on account of the same as per the University Policy or otherwise on per day/lecture basis to a maximum extent of ₹30,000/- per month, as payable to Guest Faculty members already appointed in the department. 4. The petitioner has challenged the Communication (supra) dated 04.11.2019 on the premise that the respondent-University could not have either declined the payment of consolidated salary to the petitioner in terms of order dated 31.10.2019 or further extension in his services as Assistant Professor and offered him engagement as a Guest Lecturer. 5. Objections to the petition have been filed by the respondents. 6. In the objections filed by the respondent Nos. 1 to 5, the petition is being opposed on the premise that none of the fundamental rights of the petitioner have been violated. It is being further stated that the engagementin the Universityof the faculty on contractual basis is being made strictly in terms of the provisions of Statutes 18(6) of the Central Universities Act, 2009 and that the contract period of the petitioner as contractual Assistant Professor expired in the month of May, 2019, which was further extended upto 01.07.2019, whereafter the expiry of the same, the said contractual engagement of the petitioner was not extended on one hand and, on the other hand, no other contractual employee was engaged in place of the petitioner. It is being further stated that the petitioner was engaged in B.Voc(T.M)programme under National Skill Qualification Framework (for short, ‘NSQF’) on contractual basis in terms of the University Grants 4 WP(C) No. 4262/2019 Commission (UGC) guidelines, in respect of which, the financial implications were met out of the specific Grant-in-aid from UGCand the CUJ did not receive any separate allocation for the session 2019-20 and for the said reason, no fresh/further engagements were made in the CUJ of the teaching faculty for teaching further/fresh admitted candidates under NSQF. 7. In the reply filed by the respondent 6 to the petition, it is being stated that the respondent-University was granted approval by the UGC to offer B.Voc Programmes in tourism management, retail management in the years 2014-15 & 2018-19 (with financial assistance) and for the years 2019-20 & 2020-21 (without financial assistance). It is being further stated that as per the UGC’s Communication dated 21.08.2019, institutions running skill programmes/courses in the year 2018-19 were being approved by the UGC. It is being next stated that Letter dated28.01.2019, circulating the revised guidelines for enhancement of the rates of honorarium of the Guest Faculty is self-explanatory and mandatory in nature and such Guest Faculty is a temporary need based arrangement made by the institutions and such remuneration is paid as per lecture basis, subject to the maximum ceiling per month, which engagement of the Guest Faculty cannot be treated as full time Lecturer. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. Having regard to the case set up by the petitioner, the grievances projected therein is two-fold; one that the petitioner was not paid by the respondent-University the consolidated salary upto 01.07.2019 for the services rendered in terms of the extension order dated 31.10.2019 while issuing the impugned order dated 04.11.2019 on the ground that the respondent-University did not receive approval for such extension beyond 30.06.2019 and secondly, 5 WP(C) No. 4262/2019 that the contractual engagement of the petitioner extended from time to time pursuant to the initial order of engagement dated 15.09.2015 and extension in terms of the last extension order dated 31.10.2019 came to be proposed to be altered to that of a Guest Lecturer instead of Assistant Professor unilaterally to the detriment and prejudice of the petitioner, and instead that the services of the petitioner were required to be extended as Assistant Professor. 9. It is an admitted fact emerging from the record that the contractual services of the petitioner came to be extended by the respondent-University lastly in terms of order dated 31.10.2019 upon the approval of the Vice Chancellor upto 01.07.2019 on the terms and conditions governing the engagement of the petitioner rendering the petitioner entitled to receive consolidated salary as Assistant Professor from the respondent-University uptill 01.07.2019 instead of 30.06.2019, as is provided in the impugned order dated 04.11.2019 and the respondent-University cannot deny the payment of the said consolidated salary to the petitioner on any ground whatsoever including those referred in the impugned Communication dated 04.11.2019. 10. Insofar as the grievance of the petitioner that his engagement from the Assistant Professor on contractual basis ordered by the respondent- University came to be altered unilaterally to that of the Guest Lecturer pursuant to the impugned Communication dated 04.11.2019 and that instead the services of the petitioner were required to be extended as Assistant Professor is concerned, law stands settled and is no more res-integra that a contractual employee has no right to have his or her contractual services renewed. A reference in this regard to the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court passed in case titled as, “Yogesh Mahajan Vs. Professor R.C. Deka, Director, All 6 WP(C) No. 4262/2019 Institute of Medical Sciences, reported in (2018) 3 SCC 218” would be relevant and appropriate herein. The petitioner, thus, under these circumstances, cannot seek indulgence of this Court for seeking a relief against the respondent-University qua extension of his contractual services, more so, in view of categoric stand of the respondent University that the engagement of the petitioner on contractual basis was made from time to time upon receipt of funds from the UGC, which funds, however, were not allotted to the respondent-University for the year 2019-20 for the said purpose, as such, the respondent-University could not continue the contractual services of the petitioner after the last extension order dated 31.10.2019. 11. It is significant to mention here that the working of the petitioner as Guest Lecturer after the expiry of extension period as Assistant Professor, is not in dispute, however, as per the stand taken by the respondent UGC, the Guest Lecturer is to be paid the remuneration set out by the UGC as per lecture basis. The petitioner, as such, for his working as Guest Lecturer is also required to be paid the same strictly in tune with the UGC norms on lecturer basis, subject to the maximum ceiling by the respondent University. 12. The instant petition, accordingly, in view of above analysis, shall stand disposed of. (Javed Iqbal Wani) Judge Jammu 09.07.2025 Ram Krishan Whether the order is speaking? Yes Whether the order is reportable? Yes Ram Krishan 2025.07.15 09:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document