In Brief
Teachers appointed to a university's pharmaceutical sciences department through regular selection processes under statutory procedure sought confirmation of their substantive employment status. Though appointed following proper selection committee recommendations and executive council approval, their appointment letters imposed arbitrary three-year contractual terms, unilaterally imposed without prior disclosure. After the university's conversion to a central university, a fresh advertisement for these positions was issued. The Supreme Court held that statutory selection procedure creates substantive appointment regardless of contractual nomenclature imposed thereafter; employees in unequal bargaining positions cannot be bound by arbitrary undisclosed terms violating the statutory scheme. The appellants were confirmed as substantive members of the teaching faculty with full benefits of central university service.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.