The Supreme Court of India in a recent verdict ruled in favor of three teachers who were discontinued from their services at Jamia Milia Islamia University. The court deemed the university’s decision as unjust, arbitrary, and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution, emphasizing the principles of fairness and equality in employment matters.

The case, brought forward by Meher Fatima Hussain and two others, saw a bench comprising Justices Abhay S Oka and Pankaj Mithal overturning the Delhi High Court’s previous ruling of April 11, 2023, which had dismissed the teachers' plea.

The Supreme Court's scrutiny of the case revealed that the dismissed teachers were originally appointed through a regular selection process and possessed qualifications aligned with University Grants Commission (UGC) norms. Despite this, the university opted to discontinue their services and initiate a fresh appointment process, a move deemed as unjust and arbitrary by the apex court.

The university argued that the teachers' appointments were akin to backdoor entries and cited alleged misconduct as well. A committee, led by a retired High Court Judge, was said to have recommended disciplinary actions against the teachers and suggested a fresh appointment process post-merger of positions.

However, the Supreme Court emphasized that the teachers' initial appointments followed due process and were not temporary as implied by the university. The lack of evidence showing the scheme's expiration further reinforced the court's decision in favor of continuity in service for the affected teachers.

While the court acknowledged the possibility of disciplinary proceedings, it mandated that such actions should align with fairness and due process, respecting the rights of the appellants.

The Supreme Court's directive instructed Jamia Milia Islamia University to reinstate the teachers within three months, ensuring their continuity in service and consequential benefits. However, the ruling clarified that the teachers would not receive pay and allowances for the period they were not employed.

Furthermore, the court addressed concerns regarding subsequent appointments made by the university during the legal proceedings, asserting that those appointees cannot claim equity over the affected teachers' positions. It directed the university to consider accommodating any excess appointees into vacant positions, adhering strictly to legal guidelines.

Case: MEHER FATIMA HUSSAIN vs. JAMIA MILIA ISLAMIA & ORS,

CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4963 OF 2024 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No. 8333 of 2023).

Click to read/order judgment.