The University Of Calicut vs Dr. Zubair M on 11 June, 2025

[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Kerala High Court

The University Of Calicut vs Dr. Zubair M on 11 June, 2025

The respondents 1 and 2 in W.P.(C)No.7307 of 2016 filed this intra-court appeal under Section 5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958, challenging the judgment dated 06.03.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge, whereby the writ petition was allowed holding that 1st respondent herein/writ petitioner is entitled to reckon his past service as a Technician in the Laboratory of Department of Zoology in the Calicut University for placement to higher cadres in the service of the University under the Career Advancement Scheme.

2. The 1st respondent/writ petitioner was appointed as Assistant Professor in the Department of Zoology in the University of Calicut as a direct recruit on 05.09.2012. Before appointment as Assistant Professor, he worked as Technician in the Department of Zoology of the University from 25.04.2005 to 04.09.2012. Upon being appointed as Assistant Professor, the 1st respondent made Ext.P2 request dated 15.09.2012, to the University, requesting that the period of his service as a Technician be reckoned for higher ladders in the service. However, the claim of the 1 st respondent was rejected by the syndicate of the University on it's meeting held on 15.11.2012. Then the 1st respondent approached WA NO. 1952 OF 2019 4 2025:KER:43954 this Court by filing W.P.(C)No.10968 of 2014, challenging the decision of the syndicate, and by Ext.P5 judgment dated 23.06.2015, this Court set aside the syndicate decision and directed the University to reconsider the application filed by the 1st respondent and pass a speaking order. During personal hearing, the 1st respondent submitted detailed written notes of submission to sustain his claim. But the University issued Ext.P6 communication dated 06.01.2016 rejecting the request of the 1 st respondent inter alia stating the reason that at the time of appointment, he does not possess the minimum qualification for appointment as Assistant Professor and his appointment was to the post of Technician which is included in the non-teaching post and that there is no precedent or practice in the University taking the experience in non-teaching post for placement in the teaching cadre. Along with Ext.P6, the dissenting note of one of the members of the committee was also served to the 1st respondent. Contending that at the time of his appointment as a Technician, the post which was previously known as Research Assistant, the 1st respondent had the qualification of doctoral degree in Zoology awarded on 28.07.2004, though the post is included in non- teaching service, the duties and functions of Technician in the WA NO. 1952 OF 2019 5 2025:KER:43954 laboratories of the university are aiding and assisting the research scholars and also imparting instructions to MSc students and therefore, would fall under the definition of Teacher and hence, can be reckoned for Career Advancement Scheme promotion, the 1st respondent approached this Court.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants, the learned Senior Counsel for the 1st respondent and the learned Sr.Government Pleader.

4. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit that as per Serial No.65 of the Schedule attached to Section 3 under Chapter XV of Calicut University First Ordinances, 1978, the appointing authority of the non-teaching staff Technician is the Vice-Chancellor and whereas as per Chapter 3 of Calicut University First Statute, 1977, the appointing authority of Teachers is the Syndicate. The duties of a non-teaching staff appointed as a Technician in the Laboratory are entirely different from those of a Teacher. The word Teacher is defined in Section 2(27) under Chapter I of the Calicut University Act, 1975, and the experience gained as a Technician cannot be counted as Teaching experience.

5. On the other hand, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/writ petitioner argued that in the WA NO. 1952 OF 2019 6 2025:KER:43954 writ petition, it was specifically pleaded that the duties of the 1 st respondent at the time of his employment as a Technician was aiding and assisting the research scholars and also imparting instructions to the M.Sc students. It was also pleaded that as per Section 2(27) of Chapter I of Calicut University Act, 1975, Teacher means a Principal, Professor, Associate Professor, Assistant Professor, Reader, Lecturer, Instructor or such other person imparting instruction or supervising research in any of the colleges or recognized institutions and whose appointment has been approved by the University. It is also pleaded that though the post is incorporated as a non-teaching post, the actual duties are those of a teaching post. This pleading in the writ petition is not specifically denied in the counter-affidavit filed by the appellants. Even at the time of his appointment as a Technician, the 1 st respondent was holding a Ph.D as evident from Ext.P1 document and was qualified for the post of Assistant Professor under the UGC Regulations, 2010. However, his claim was rejected by Ext.P7 order of the Syndicate, which is not a speaking order. Considering all these aspects, the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition and hence no interference is needed to that judgment.

WA NO. 1952 OF 2019 7 2025:KER:43954

6. The 1st respondent was working as a Technician in the Laboratory of the Department of Zoology in the University of Calicut from 25.04.2005 till 04.09.2012. It is also evident from Ext.P1 notification dated 28.07.2004 of the University produced by the 1st respondent that he was awarded with a degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) in Zoology in the faculty of science on 28.07.2004, i.e. prior to his appointment as a Technician. According to the 1st respondent, though the post of Technician is included in the category of non-teaching staff, the duties imparted was that of an Instructor, which will fall under the definition of Teacher under Section 2(27) of Chapter I of the Calicut University Act, 1975 and hence the said service period has to be reckoned for Career Advancement Scheme. Whereas according to the University and the Government, the post of Technician is a non- teaching post and it will not come under the definition of Teacher and hence cannot be considered for Career Advancement.

7. The qualification of an Assistant Professor stated in regulation 4.4.0 of the UGC regulations 2010 reads as under:

"4.4.0 ASSISTANT PROFESSOR 4.4.1. Arts, Humanities, Sciences, Social Sciences, Commerce, Education, Languages, Law, Journalism and Mass Communication WA NO. 1952 OF 2019 8 2025:KER:43954 i. Good academic record as defined by the concerned university with at least 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever grading system is followed) at the Master's Degree level in a relevant subject from an Indian University, or an equivalent degree from an accredited foreign university.

ii. Besides fulfilling the above qualifications, the candidate must have cleared the National Eligibility Test (NET) conducted by the UGC, CSIR or similar test accredited by the UGC like SLET/SET.

iii. Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-clauses (i) and (ii) to this Clause 4.4.1. candidates, who are, or have been awarded a Ph. D. Degree in accordance with the University Grants Commission (Minimum Standards and Procedure for Award of Ph.D. Degree) Regulations, 2009, shall be exempted from the requirement of the minimum eligibility condition of NET/SLET/SET for recruitment and appointment of Assistant Professor or equivalent positions in Universities/ Colleges/Institutions. iv. NET/SLET/SET shall also not be required for such Masters Programmes in disciplines for which NET/SLET/SET is not conducted."

8. Similarly the qualifications of an Associate Professor laid down in regulation 4.3.0 of the said regulations reads as under:

"4.3.0 ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR i. Good academic record with a Ph.D. Degree in the concerned/allied/relevant disciplines.

WA NO. 1952 OF 2019 9 2025:KER:43954 ii. A Master's Degree with at least 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point scale wherever grading system is followed).

iii. A minimum of eight years of experience of teaching and/or research in an academic/research position equivalent to that of Assistant Professor in a University, College or Accredited Research Institution/industry excluding the period of Ph.D. research with evidence of published work and a minimum of 5 publications as books and/or research/policy papers. iv. Contribution to educational innovation, design of new curricula and courses, and technology - mediated teaching learning process with evidence of having guided doctoral candidates and research students.

v. A minimum score as stipulated in the Academic Performance Indicator (API) based Performance Based Appraisal System (PBAS), set out in this Regulation in Appendix III."

9. Section 2(27) of the Calicut University Act, 1975 defines a Teacher as under:

""Teacher" means a principal, professor, associate professor, assistant professor, reader, lecturer, instructor, or such other person imparting instruction or supervising research in any of the colleges or recognized institutions and whose appointment has been approved by the University;"

10. As per Section 2(28) of the Calicut University Act, Teacher of the University means 'a person employed as teacher in any institution maintained by the University.' The 1st respondent is claiming his past service as a Technician to be reckoned for his WA NO. 1952 OF 2019 10 2025:KER:43954 promotion from the post of Assistant Professor to Associate Professor by virtue of regulation 4.3.0 (iii) of the UGC regulations. Therefore, the prime question to be decided herein is as to whether a person who was working as a Technician in the Laboratory of the University is doing the duty of a Teacher under Section 2(27) of the Calicut University Act.

11. As pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellants, the post of Technician falls under schedule of non- teaching staff. As per Serial No.65 of the Schedule attached to Section 3 under Chapter XV of Calicut University First Ordinances, 1978, the appointing authority of the Technician is the Vice- Chancellor, whereas as per Chapter III of the Calicut University First Statute, 1977, the appointing authority of an Assistant Professor is the Syndicate.

12. When by virtue of Ext.P5 judgment dated 23.06.2015, this Court set aside the decision of the Syndicate as a non speaking order and directed to reconsider the claim of the 1 st respondent, it was again considered by the Syndicate, but was rejected by Ext.P7 order dated 10.12.2015. However, on going though Ext.P7, we notice that none of the contentions of the 1st respondent or that of the appellants considered in Ext.P7 order. It WA NO. 1952 OF 2019 11 2025:KER:43954 is a non speaking order. It does not contain any reason to support the decision contained therein and therefore Ext.P7 order also not legally sustainable. In such circumstance, we deem it appropriate to quash Ext.P7 order dated 10.12.2015 of the University of Calicut and direct the University to reconsider the contentions of the 1st respondent on merits and pass a detailed order thereon with reasons, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after affording an opportunity to the 1st respondent to make written as well as oral submissions.

The writ appeal is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE Sd-

MURALEE KRISHNA S., JUDGE DSV/-

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court