4 min readVadodaraMar 13, 2026 10:41 PM IST
First published on: Mar 13, 2026 at 10:36 PM IST
Stating that internal disputes between a state university and the University Grants Commission (UGC) over the funding or grants is not an appropriate excuse to deny payment to a teacher, the Gujarat High Court held that the Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University (MKBU) is in “legal obligation” to reimburse a salary of Rs 12.45 lakh to a female assistant professor for the service between 2013 and 2016.
The bench of Justice M J Shelat of the Gujarat High Court was hearing a petition of a former assistant professor of the Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University seeking directions to the university to release the unpaid salary for the period December 2013 to November 2016, which had been withheld citing that the UGC had not released the promised grant.
The petitioner had originally also challenged an April 2016 order of the university terminating her service, but subsequently decided to only press the petition seeking salary.
The HC noted in the judgment delivered on March 10 and made available on Friday that the December 2013 appointment of the petitioner by the university was in pursuance of a scheme floated by the UGC and as per the agreement between the university and the UGC, the necessary expenditure pertaining to the salary and other expenses was to be reimbursed by the UGC to the university. The court noted that records had shown that the grant was not released in favour of the university for “some breach of the condition / scheme by (the university)”.
Stating that the university cannot arbitrarily refuse to make payment of salary to the petitioner after availing service, the judgment states, “This court is not concerned about the… internal dispute between… university and the UGC. The fact remains that the petitioner had served the university for the period between December 27, 2013 to November 6, 2016, and has not received any salary for the said period from the university…”
The judgment further states, “Once the service of the petitioner is availed of by the university, it would not be appropriate on the part of the university, being a State under Article 12 of the Constitution of India, to act arbitrarily whereby it refused to make payment of salary to the petitioner, being a teacher appointed by the university. There is no justifiable reason forthcoming from the side of the respondent-university which would appeal to this court to take any other view than the view as aforesaid…”
Advocate Nikunt Raval, appearing for the university requested the court to not entertain the petition and submitted that the programme under which the appointment of the petitioner was made was to be financed and run from the grant received from the UGC and due to non-receipt of the grant, the “university is not in a position to make the payment of salary to the petitioner”.
Holding that the university has been unable to “deny the legitimate claims of the petitioner” from the facts placed on record, the court said it would be “a legal obligation on the part of the university, being an employer, to pay salary to its employee”.
Allowing the petition filed by the assistant professor, the HC directed the university to pay a salary of Rs 12.45 lakh to the petitioner on or before June 15, 2026, failing which, the petitioner would be “entitled to receive the arrears of salary for the said period with 6% per annum interest till its realisation” from the university.
Allowing the petition filed by the assistant professor, the HC directed the university to pay a salary of Rs 12.45 lakh to the petitioner on or before June 15, 2026. (Source: File/ Representational) 
Share
