Statutory appointment rules defeat implied service continuation, while termination based on an unsaved enquiry report is invalid.

A statute-prescribed mode of appointment prevailed over any implied engagement: continued work, salary payments, or administrative acts could not create a valid appointment where contract employees were excluded by the transitional provision. The teacher therefore had no legal right to continue in service after statutory cessation. A termination based on an enquiry report that had no continuing force under the new statutory regime was invalid to that extent, because adverse reliance on that report was contrary to the statute and stigmatic. However, reinstatement was not sustainable as a matter of right in the absence of a valid subsisting appointment.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a teacher whose contractual tenure had ceased by operation of the university statute could claim continuation in service on the basis of implied appointment or the conduct of university ; (ii) Whether termination founded on an enquiry report not continued or validated under the new statutory regime was valid.

Issue (i): Whether a teacher whose contractual tenure had ceased by operation of the university statute could claim continuation in service on the basis of implied appointment or the conduct of university authorities.

Analysis: The statutory scheme vested the power of appointment in the University Council, subject to the prescribed procedure and recommendation of the Selection Committee. The respondent had been serving on contract, and the relevant transitional provision expressly excluded contract employees from continued service after the stipulated period unless the Chancellor otherwise ordered. Mere continuance in the campus, payment of salary, extension of probation, or other administrative acts by the Vice-Chancellor could not create a legally valid appointment contrary to the statute. An implied engagement de hors the Act would defeat the statutory control over appointments.

Conclusion: The respondent had no legal right to continue in service after the statutory cessation, and the plea of implied appointment failed.

Issue (ii): Whether termination founded on an enquiry report not continued or validated under the new statutory regime was valid.

Analysis: The enquiry initiated under the earlier legal framework had no continued force under the later statute, and the report could not be used as adverse material against the respondent. A punitive termination based on that report was therefore contrary to the statute and carried a stigma, making the order legally unsustainable to that extent. At the same time, the absence of a valid subsisting appointment meant that no reinstatement could follow as a matter of right.

Conclusion: The termination order was void to the extent it rested on the invalid enquiry report, but the direction of reinstatement was not sustainable.

Final Conclusion: The appeal succeeded in overturning the reinstatement order, while the termination was declared invalid on the ground of statutory violation; the parties were left to bear their own costs.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a statute prescribes the mode of appointment and limits the tenure of contract employees, continued working or administrative acquiescence cannot create a valid appointment contrary to the statute, and disciplinary action based on an enquiry not saved by the successor statute cannot validly support a punitive termination.

---