State government has denied paying salaries to the employees of affiliated colleges because of paucity of fund. We are non-teaching staff of the seven colleges have affiliation from the XXX university. Our services are approved by the government, and we are duly appointed in accordance with the rules of the university. But the university has denied paying salaries to the employees of affiliated colleges because of paucity of fund. The appointment process for non-teaching staff at XXX University is governed by Chapter 20 of the Ist Statute.
Additionally, Statute 21.01, which refers to Section 49(e) of the 1973 Act, defines a salaried employee who is not a college teacher. Furthermore, Statute 21.02(1) empowers the management to appoint non-teaching staff. According to Statute 21.03(4), appointments made by the Committee of Management and the Principal must be submitted for approval to the Director of Higher Education. If the approval is not granted within two months of receipt, the appointments will be deemed to have been approved. In our case approval was obtained. The state government has issues a circular and denied to paying salaries.
Based on the information provided, it appears that your appointment was made in accordance with the prescribed procedures and there is no dispute regarding it. Furthermore, as per Section 60E of the U.P. State Universities Act, 1973, the responsibility of paying the salaries of teachers and other employees of the colleges lies with the state government.
It is important to note that the state government cannot retract from its mandatory obligation to bear the financial liabilities of paying salaries, which has been conferred upon it by statute. Therefore, any circular issued by the state government to absolve itself from the payment of salaries would be considered illegal as it would be in violation of the statutory provisions.
In the case of Dr. Rajinder Singh v. State of Punjab; [(2001) 5 SCC 482], the court established that no government order, notification, or circular can serve as a substitute for statutory rules that have been created with the authority of law. This means that any government directive must be in accordance with the statutory rules that have been established through legal processes.
In other words, statutory rules have greater legal weight than administrative orders or directives issued by the government. This principle is a settled position of law, meaning that it is widely accepted and established as a legal principle.
You should move a writ petition in the High Court under article 226 for quashing of the circular because that circular is ultra virus. The government cannot override the statute by a circular. Circular is an administrative order passed by the state to clarify the provisions of the statute rater then substitute. Hence, the circular is liable to be quashed.
