No Reservation To Post Of College Principal: Bombay High Court Paves Way For Recruitment Of Principal At Law College In Aurangabad

The Bombay High Court has reiterated that no reservation mandated by the Maharashtra Educational Institutions (Reservation in Teachers’ Cadre) Act, 2021 (Act of 2021) is applicable to the post of principal in colleges.

A division bench of Justice Mangesh S Patil and Justice Shailesh P Brahme sitting at Aurangabad held that a Government Resolution dated September 23, 2016, excluding the post of principal from reservation prevails over the Maharashtra Public Universities Act, 2016, that provides for reservation for teachers.

“The G. R. dated 23.09.2016 still holds the field and applies with full force. It excludes the isolated post from applicability of reservation policy. We are of the view that the posts of principals rendering services in colleges are not covered by the reservation policy. It is immaterial that multiple colleges are run by the same institution. Being an isolated post, the principles laid down in above referred judgments apply with full force”, the court held.

The court was dealing with a writ petition filed by Marathwada Legal and General Education Society, Aurangabad challenging communications from State authorities insisting to apply the reservation policy to the appointment of the principal of the colleges run by the petitioner.

The petitioner operates Manikchand Pahade Law College and Dr. (Smt.) Indirabai Bhaskarrao Pathak Mahila Arts, Commerce, and Science College in Aurangabad. Both colleges are aided institutions. Post of principal in the Mahila College became vacant on May 01, 2022, while the acting principal of the law college is due to retire on September 30, 2023. However, the recruitment process has been stalled due to the controversy regarding applicability of reservation of the post of principal.

The petitioner's contention was that the posts of principal in the colleges they oversee were isolated positions and should not be subject to the reservation policy. Further, the petitioner relied on Government Resolution dated September 23, 2016, which stipulates that the post of principal is open to all and to be filled in on merits.

The respondents, including Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University and the State of Maharashtra, contended that the posts of principal were part of the 'teachers' cadre' as defined in Section 2(o) of the Act of 2021. Under Section 2(61) of the Maharashtra Public Universities Act, 2016 (Act of 2016), a principal is a teacher, and total sanctioned posts in all the colleges run by the same management have to be considered for providing reservation for the post, as per the respondents. According to the respondents, the reservation policy was applicable, citing the Act of 2021 and related government resolutions.

The court said that while principals are essentially teachers, their role encompasses distinct administrative duties. The court highlighted the disparity in grade pay and the hierarchical position of principals as evidence of their unique status.

The court emphasized that the Act of 2021 is a special law with a specific focus on reservation policy. It pointed out that the Act defines "teachers' cadre” based on members being remunerated at the same grade of pay. The court noted that the posts of principal did not share the same grade of pay as other teaching staff, such as professors and lecturers, and therefore, did not fall under the definition of 'teachers’ cadre.' The court emphasized that the definition in the Act of 2021 could not be interpreted to treat the posts of principal at par with teaching staff for all purposes, especially with regards to reservation.

The court referred to Supreme Court judgment in Post Graduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Chandigarh v. Faculty Association (1998) which held that in the case of a single or isolated post, reservation at any point of time would lead to total exclusion of candidates from the general category, which is against the constitution. Consequently, the court held that there could be no reservation for a single post.

The court held that the communication by the Assistant Commissioner, Backward Class Cell, Aurangabad holding that the reservation policy is applicable to the post of principal and directing the colleges to get the roster examined by it is patently illegal.

Therefore, the court quashed all the impugned government communications and declared that the posts of principals in the petitioner institution were not subject to the policy of reservation.

“It is hereby declared that the posts of principals in the colleges run by the petitioner institution are not governed by the policy of reservation and the provisions of the Act of 2021”, the court declared.

The court also directed the respondents to process the petitioner's proposal for recruiting principals in accordance with the law.

Case no. – Writ Petition No. 3108 of 2023

Case Title – Marathwada Legal and General Education Society, Aurangabad v. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, Aurangabad and Ors.

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment