Broad statutory definition of teachers supports grievance jurisdiction for unapproved full-time teachers under the university law.

Section 2(35) of the Maharashtra University of Health Sciences Act was read as including both approved categories of teachers and a wider residual class of persons teaching full time in affiliated colleges or approved institutions. The Supreme Court held that Section 53's Grievances Committee could entertain complaints by unapproved teachers within that residual category, because the statutory language and remedial purpose were broad enough to cover them. Ejusdem generis could not be used to narrow the definition where the text showed a contrary intention and a restrictive reading would make the wider words redundant. The High Court's contrary view was set aside and the grievance forum was held available to such teachers.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Grievance Committee under Section 53 of the Maharashtra University of Health Sciences Act, 1998 had jurisdiction to entertain complaints by unapproved teachers falling within Section 2(35) of the Act.

Analysis: Section 2(35) defines teachers in two parts: first, enumerated approved categories, and secondly, other persons teaching or giving instructions on full time basis in affiliated colleges or approved institutions. Section 53 creates a Grievances Committee to deal with grievances of teachers and other employees and empowers it to entertain complaints and make recommendations. The wide language of the definition and the grievance machinery shows a legislative intent to cover full-time teachers even if their appointments are not approved. The principle of ejusdem generis could not be applied to confine the definition, because the text itself indicates a contrary intention and the wider words would otherwise be rendered redundant. The statute had to be construed to give effect to the remedial purpose of providing an effective grievance forum and protecting teachers against workplace harassment.

Conclusion: The Grievance Committee had jurisdiction to entertain the complaints of unapproved teachers; the restrictive view taken by the High Court was incorrect.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded and the High Court's judgment was set aside, while the writ petition was to be reconsidered in the light of the ruling on jurisdiction.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statutory definition expressly includes a broad residual category in addition to enumerated classes, ejusdem generis cannot be used to exclude that residual category, especially when such an interpretation would defeat the remedial purpose of the statute.

---