The State Government should desist from undertaking ad-hoc exercise instead of giving regular appointment of college teachers, observed the Orissa High Court while disposing of a batch of writ petitions relating to disputes on the issue seniority of lecturers and principals of government-run college teachers.
Quashing the circular dated 31 August, 2020 issued by the Department of Higher Education, Justice Dr. S.K.Panigrahi directed the government to begin afresh the seniority issue by taking into consideration the date of entry into service as the basis for seniority.
The question of seniority is the most common litigation amongst the employees but a model employer like the state needs to minimize such litigations by giving consistent, fair and transparent deal with its employees, Justice Dr. Panigrahi stated in the judgment.
When a State indulges in ad hocism, it not only invites litigation with its own employees, but also creates causes and generates litigations among its employees, which results in bitterness among the employees and is bound to affect the organizational efficiency of the institution concerned and it leads to animosity, jealousy and anguish among the employees, the HC single bench observed.
Thus, ad-hocism creates litigation not only between the employer and the employees, but also between those, who receive the benefits of ad hocism, and those, who feel aggrieved for not being given the benefit of such ad hocism. This is not a hallmark of a sound personnel policy.
It is bound to have serious repercussions on the educational institutions and the students studying there.
This spoils system of ad hocism must come to an end as it is retrograded and antithesis of Article-14 of the Constitution.
In the above circumstances, this Court feels it appropriate to suggest the State to appoint permanent Principals instead of principal-in-charge by following a proper seniority principle as established by law, the judgment concluded.