THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.20583 OF 2009 Dated: 01.12.2009 Between: Dr. K. Vijaya Lakshmi … petitioner And Sri Padmavathi Mahila Viswa Vidyalayam, Tirupati, Chittoor District, rep. by Its Registrar. … Respondent THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI WRIT PETITION No.20583 OF 2009 ORDER: This writ petition is filed seeking a declaration that the action of the respondent – Sri Padmavathi Mahila Viswa Vidyalayam, Tirupati – in not appointing the petitioner in the vacant post of Assistant Librarian in the Department of Library and Information Science as arbitrary and illegal. The facts, in brief, are as under : The petitioner joined the services of the 1st respondent University in the cadre of Library Assistant. While working as such, the respondent vide notification dated 7.10.2004 invited applications from the qualified women candidates for the posts specified therein sanctioned by University Grants Commission for the X Plan period upto 31.03.2007. Pursuant thereto, the petitioner had applied for the post of Assistant Librarian and having been selected by the duly constituted Selection Committee, the petitioner was appointed to the said post vide proceedings of the respondent dated 19.11.2004. However the said appointment was on contract basis with a consolidated monthly pay of Rs.13,500/-. The petitioner joined the duty on 2.12.2004 without prejudice to her right to claim the UGC scale of pay. She also filed W.P.No.23632 of 2004 seeking a direction to the respondent to pay the salary in the scale of pay of Rs.8000- 275-13500 with usual allowances w.e.f. 2.12.2004. During pendency of the said writ petition, though the respondent cancelled the appointment of the petitioner, subsequently the Executive Council of the respondent reconsidered the matter and by Resolution No.5 dated 18.2.2006 resolved to approve to continue the petitioner with the scale of pay applicable to the post of Assistant Librarian with retrospective effect from 2.12.2004. It was also resolved by the Executive Council to address the Government to accord permission to continue the post of Assistant Librarian held by the petitioner beyond X plan period i.e., from 1.4.2007. The petitioner had withdrawn W.P.No.23632 of 2004. Though the respondent addressed a letter dated 2.2.2007 to the Government to accord permission for continuation of the post of Assistant Librarian held by the petitioner beyond X plan period and also to sanction additional grant, no orders have been passed by the Government so far. In the circumstances, the petitioner was constrained to file W.P.No.5605 of 2007 seeking a declaration that the action of the Government in not according permission as sought by the petitioner is arbitrary and illegal. The said writ petition is pending and pursuant to the interim direction granted by this Court to continue the petitioner in the post of Assistant Librarian without insisting for permission from the Government, the petitioner is being continued in the post of Assistant Librarian as on today. While so, a clear vacancy in the post of Assistant Librarian has arisen in the respondent University on 1.7.2008 on the retirement of one D. Rajeswari, who was holding the substantive post of Assistant Librarian in the Department of Library and Information Science. By letter dated 5.2.2009 the respondent University sought permission of the Government to fill up the said vacancy and further steps are yet to be taken. The petitioner, who claims appointment against the said clear vacancy, filed this writ petition contending that having been selected by a duly constituted Selection Committee in the selections held on 16.11.2004, she is fully qualified for absorption in the said post of Assistant Librarian. It is also contended that since she has been continuing as Assistant Librarian in the respondent University and that the Executive Council has also resolved to sanction scale of pay applicable to the post of Assistant Librarian w.e.f. 2.12.2004 and the respondent has requested the Government to accord necessary permission to meet the expenditure for the post of Assistant Librarian within block grant, the respondent University ought to have absorbed the petitioner in the existing vacancy of Assistant Librarian w.e.f. 1.7.2008 instead of proposing to notify the vacancy. In the counter-affidavit filed on behalf of the respondents, it is stated that the petitioner’s appointment to the post of Assistant Librarian is purely on contract basis up to the end of UGC X plan period and it cannot be reckoned as University service. It is further stated that pursuant to the resolution passed by the Executive Council, though the respondent University addressed letters to the Government to accord permission to the University to continue the post of Assistant Librarian beyond X plan period by sanctioning additional grant after five years i.e., after 1.4.2007, there is no response from the Government. I have heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material on record. At the outset, it is to be noticed that the appointment of the petitioner as Assistant Librarian on 2.12.2004 was purely on contract basis against a post to which the grant was provided by the UGC for the X plan period ending on 31.3.2007. The Government by letter dated 10.8.2004 accorded permission to fill up the said post on contract basis during X plan period by restricting the expenditure to the grant sanctioned by UGC. Thus the services rendered by the petitioner during the said period as per the terms in the agreement of contract of service cannot be taken as regular service. In the notification, dated 7.10.2004, itself it was clearly mentioned that the said post was purely temporary and on contract basis up to the end of X plan period. It is also relevant to note that the post held by the petitioner does not have the concurrence of the State Government as on today and nothing could be placed before this Court to show that the petitioner was assured payment of UGC scales. However since she is being paid the scale of pay applicable to the post of Assistant Librarian as per the resolution of the Executive Council, it is not necessary for this Court to express any opinion as to the petitioner’s entitlement for scale of pay. So far as the vacancy arose to the post of Assistant Librarian in the Department of Library and Information Science is concerned, it is not in dispute that it is a regular post which has the permission of the State Government. On the other hand, the appointment of the petitioner dated 2.12.2004 was against a sanctioned post under X plan period of UGC for a prescribed period. It is true that the said appointment was pursuant to a notification and the selection was made by a duly constituted Selection Committee. However, that itself does not confer any vested right on the petitioner to claim absorption into a regular post. The University is bound to fill up the said vacancy following the procedure prescribed under law and whenever a notification is issued, it is open to the petitioner to apply for the same provided the eligibility criteria is satisfied. In such an event, her candidature will be considered along with other eligible candidates following due process of law. As no case is made out to hold that the petitioner is entitled for being automatically absorbed into the regular vacancy in question, the Mandamus as prayed for cannot be granted and accordingly the Writ Petition is hereby dismissed. No costs. ____________ G. ROHINI, J. Dt. 01.12.2009 gbs