The Chhattisgarh High Court in Bilaspur recently dismissed an appeal by a guest lecturer challenging a government policy that could lead to the replacement of temporary guest lecturers by new candidates with higher qualifications. The case, WA No. 729 of 2024, was decided by a bench comprising Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Bibhu Datta Guru, who upheld the state’s right to implement policies favoring qualified and competent faculty in educational institutions.
Background of the Case
The appellant, Gayatri Sharma, currently employed as a guest lecturer in Political Science at Government Dr. Radhabai Naveen Girls College, Raipur, appealed the Chhattisgarh High Court’s earlier decision. Sharma’s petition sought to secure her position, claiming that the government’s recent guest lecturer policy violated an existing judicial order that protected her role from replacement by another guest lecturer.
In 2022, Sharma had successfully petitioned the court for an order preventing her replacement by other guest lecturers, so long as no performance complaints were lodged against her. However, in June 2024, the state government introduced a revised guest lecturer policy, mandating compliance with University Grants Commission (UGC) standards for educational qualifications.
Legal Issues and Arguments
The legal arguments in this case focused on the enforceability of earlier judicial protection orders and the extent to which the state could enact policies affecting guest lecturers’ tenure based on qualifications. Sharma’s counsel, Mr. Mateen Siddiqui, argued that the new policy contradicted the court’s previous order protecting her position, emphasizing that the 2022 order had not been appealed or modified, thus attaining finality. He further contended that the 2024 policy unfairly neglected these protections and argued that no new advertisement for guest lecturer posts should have been issued.
In contrast, Mr. Y.S. Thakur, representing the state, argued that the earlier order only restrained the state from replacing Sharma with guest lecturers of similar qualification and did not prevent the government from enforcing new educational standards through revised policies. He maintained that the guest lecturer role was inherently temporary, with each session requiring re-appointment as per UGC qualifications and policy compliance.
Court’s Observations and Decision
The court found that the 2024 policy requiring adherence to UGC standards was reasonable and aligned with the state’s objective of enhancing academic quality in higher education. Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha, delivering the bench’s ruling, cited a precedent from the Orissa High Court and underscored the distinction between permanent employment and ad-hoc appointments. He noted, “A subsequent policy brought in by the State Government which provides for a better and higher qualification with respect to appointment on a post which is temporary/ad hoc in nature, cannot be held to be arbitrary or unreasonable.”
The court highlighted that judicial protection for guest lecturers, as granted in the 2022 order, extended only to replacements by those of similar qualifications, not to the state’s right to hire candidates with enhanced qualifications through a lawful policy revision.
The bench further explained the importance of setting academic standards as outlined by the UGC regulations. It stressed that the government’s initiative to hire more qualified lecturers was in the best interest of educational quality and, ultimately, of the students.
Key Quotes from the Judgment
– “Precedent should be followed only so far as it marks the path of justice,” the court remarked, referencing the importance of context in judicial decisions.
– The court also noted that “the state has formulated the policy adhering to the Regulation 2018… in the larger interest of the students.”
