Aurangabad bench of Bombay HC
The petitioners, including assistant professors, an assistant librarian, a head clerk and peons, were appointed between 2011 and 2012 in Model Colleges at Ghansawangi in Jalna district and Hingoli. Despite serving continuously for 10-12 years, they remained on successive 11-month contracts with technical breaks and consolidated salaries. Rejecting the state’s stand that the posts were never sanctioned and that its financial liability was capped at Rs 1.5 crore annually under a 2013 GR, the court noted that proposals seeking approval of posts had been sent by the university in 2011 and again in 2014 but were never decided.
The court further found that the petitioners had been appointed through a valid recruitment process involving public advertisements and selection committees, and therefore their appointments could not be termed illegal. Because their appointment letters described the posts as temporary, invoking the doctrines of promissory estoppel and legitimate expectation, the court held that employees could not be deprived of regular service benefits merely.
A division bench of Justices Kishore Sant and Jitendra Jain allowed a batch of petitions, terming the state’s conduct “highly deplorable” and a case of “administrative inertia”. “With great power comes great responsibility,” the bench observed, expressing hope that state govt would introspect and ensure the institutions functioned as true model colleges. Holding the state bound by its commitment to bear the entire recurring expenditure of the colleges, including salaries, the bench said financial constraints could not justify denial of pay according to prescribed rules.
In a sharp rebuke, the court observed that govt had failed in its constitutional obligations and turned away from commitments it had voluntarily undertaken. The bench held that govt could not indefinitely sit over the proposals and later cite the lack of sanction as a defence. Observing that such decisions should ordinarily be taken within a year, the court ruled that proposals pending for more than a decade must be treated as deemed approved. It described the govt’s undertaking as being akin to a sovereign guarantee. It also found violations of constitutional guarantees of equality and fair treatment, noting that faculty members in Model Colleges performed the same duties as teachers in other affiliated colleges but were paid significantly less.
Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar: Aurangabad bench of Bombay high court on Thursday came down heavily on Maharashtra govt for keeping proposals to sanction posts in two Model Colleges in Jalna and Hingoli pending for over a decade, directing regularisation of teaching and non-teaching staff and payment of salaries as per university and University Grants Commission (UGC) norms.
The bench additionally noted that its earlier directions, including orders passed in Sept 2021 and Feb 2026, remained unimplemented for years, underscoring what it described as the state’s persistent inaction. Stay updated with the latest Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar news. Download the TOI App.
The state has been directed to clear the dues within six months, failing which the amount will carry 6% annual interest. HC ordered that all petitioners who continued in service until the date of the judgment be regularised from their initial date of appointment. actual arrears will be restricted to three years prior to the filing of the petitions While salary fixation will be calculated from the date they joined service. State govt and the university have also been ordered to issue formal regularisation orders specifying applicable pay scales.