Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Dr. Man Mohan Swaroop Mathur vs Chancellor, J.N.V.U. Jod. & Ors on 9 July, 2009
Author: Prakash Tatia
Bench: Prakash Tatia
1
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3999/1996
Dr. Manmohan Swaroop Mathur.
vs.
Chancellor, JNV University & Ors.
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3999/1996
Dr. Manmohan Swaroop Mathur.
vs.
Chancellor, Jai Narain Vyas University and Ors.
Date : 9.7.2009
HON'BLE MR. PRAKASH TATIA, J.
Mr.PS Bhati ) for the petitioner.
Mr.N Dungawat ) Mr.RL Jangid, AAG ) for the respondents. Mr.Salil Trivedi )
- - - - -
Heard learned counsel for the parties.
The petitioner has been denied promotion to the post of Reader in Rajasthani as Syndicate in its meeting dated 18/19.7.95 refused to recommend the petitioner's name for promotion to the post of Reader and that was endorsed by the Vice Chancellor of the University and ultimately, by His Excellency the Governor of Rajasthan (Chancellor of the University) decision of which 2 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3999/1996 Dr. Manmohan Swaroop Mathur.
vs. Chancellor, JNV University & Ors.
was conveyed to the petitioner vide Annex.25.
The petitioner has educational qualification of M.A. (Hindi) - 1967, M.A. (Sanskrit) - 1982, Ph.D. (Hindi) - 1974 and Post Graduate Diploma (Journalism) - 1977. The petitioner was appointed on the post of Assistant Professor (Lecturer) in Rajasthani vide order dated 1.10.84. It will be worthwhile to mention here that before creation of Department of Rajasthani, subject Rajasthani was under the Department of Hindi in the University of Jodhpur itself. From 14.7.75, in the Statute of University of Jodhpur by Statute No.8(2)(b) it has been provided that "Rajasthani will be a distinctly separate department of studies in the Faculty of Arts. It is quite distinct from subject of Hindi or Sanskrit".
For promotion to the post of Reader, requisite qualifications are prescribed in the Rules for implementing Career Advancement Scheme for the Teachers at the level of Assistant Professors (Lecturers) in the University, copy of which has 3 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3999/1996 Dr. Manmohan Swaroop Mathur.
vs. Chancellor, JNV University & Ors.
been placed on record as Annex.3. The eligibility for promotion to the post of Reader is given in Clause 4 which provides that every Assistant Professor (Lecturer) in general faculties in the senior scale of Rs.3000-5000 will be eligible for promotion to the post of Associate Professor (Reader) in the pay scale of Rs.3700-5700 as given in Ordinance 317 if he/she has completed 8 years of service in the senior scale. It is provided under clause (a) of Rule 4 that the requirement of 8 years of service will be relaxed if the total service of Lecturer is not less than 16 years with entitlement of relaxation as in Rule 3(a). Therefore, the candidate should have 8 years experience of service in senior scale obviously on the post of Assistant Professor (Lecturer) in faculty.
Senior scale can be given to a person as per Rule 3 which provides that every Assistant Professor (Lecturer) will be placed in a senior scale of Rs.3000-5000 as provided in Ordinance 317 if he/she has completed 8 years of service after regular appointment.
4S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3999/1996 Dr. Manmohan Swaroop Mathur.
vs. Chancellor, JNV University & Ors.
Therefore, a joint reading of Rules 3 and 4 will make it clear that any Lecturer is eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of Reader provided he has completed 8 years of service and should have been placed in senior scale, then he should have completed 8 years service in the senior scale and that makes in total 16 years of service experience. Service experience can be relaxed under Rule 3 but that is in a case where existing Assistant Professor (Lecturer) with Ph.D. and M.Phil. Degree in faculties other than the Engineering faculty is there. Admittedly, the petitioner though possesses degree of Ph.D. but not M.Phil. and furthermore is that his degree is in subject Hindi and not in Rajasthani which was made a distinct faculty from 1975.
The contention of the petitioner is that he was appointed Lecturer in Hindi in 1971 in B.N. College, Udaipur and worked there till 1975. Then he worked as Lecturer in Hindi in Janta College, Bawal (Haryana) for the period from 1975 to 1978 5 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3999/1996 Dr. Manmohan Swaroop Mathur.
vs. Chancellor, JNV University & Ors.
and then he worked as Lecturer in Hindi in I.B. College, Panipat from 1978 to 1984. Thereafter, he was appointed as Assistant Professor (Lecturer) in Rajasthani in the University of Jodhpur from 1.10.84. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner's entire service period should have been taken into account because of the reason that on earlier occasion, the University of Jodhpur in the case of Dr.S.D. Kavia took into account his service experience of the period when he was lecturer in the faculty of Hindi and he was given promotion as Reader in Rajasthani and following the same, even the Vice Chancellor vide communication dated 18.1.1995 to the Chancellor recommended the case of the petitioner. It is also submitted that the members of the Syndicate also opined in favour of the petitioner and gave a representation (Annex.10) to the Syndicate and pointed out that the petitioner was entitled to promotion.
I considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and perused the facts as 6 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3999/1996 Dr. Manmohan Swaroop Mathur.
vs. Chancellor, JNV University & Ors.
well as the documents placed on record.
It is not in dispute that the petitioner has educational qualifications of passing M.A. (Hindi), M.A. (Sanskrit) and he did his Ph.D. in Hindi in the year 1974. He worked as Lecturer in Hindi from 1974 to 1984 till he was appointed on the post of Lecturer (Rajasthani) on 1.10.84.
As per Statute No.8(2)(b) inserted on 14.7.75, Rajasthani was made a separate department of studies in the faculty of Arts in the University of Jodhpur. The petitioner was given appointment as Lecturer (Rajasthani) after said Statute No.8 (2)(b) came into force. The petitioner's service experience in the field of Hindi was an experience in distinct subject in the light of Statute No.8 (2)(b) wherein it has clearly been mentioned that subject Rajasthani shall be quiet distinct from subjects of Hindi or Sanskrit. The petitioner who was appointed for the first time as Lecturer in Rajasthani vide order dated 1.10.84 completed his service experience of 8 years in the year 1992 and 7 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3999/1996 Dr. Manmohan Swaroop Mathur.
vs. Chancellor, JNV University & Ors.
at the time of selections in the year 1995, he had not completed 8 years of service experience as Assistant Professor in Rajasthani in senior scale, which is the requirement for consideration of the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Reader and this was one of the grounds given by the Syndicate in its recommendation for rejection of the petitioner's candidature for the post of Reader in Rajasthani. The petitioner also did not complete 16 years of service in Rajasthani as Associate Professor. His experience in Hindi could not have been taken into account in view of Statute No.8(2)(b) referred above. About the recommendation of the case of Dr.Kaviya, complete facts are not before this Court. Therefore, that recommendation of Vice Chancellor which has not been accepted by the Chancellor and the detail decision given by the Syndicate gave all those reasons which disentitles the petitioner from promotion to the post of Reader, appears to be in consonance with the Career Advancement Scheme referred above and the provisions made thereunder. It is not a case either of wrongful rejection of 8 S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.3999/1996 Dr. Manmohan Swaroop Mathur.
vs. Chancellor, JNV University & Ors.
the petitioner's candidature by wrong interpretation of the provisions nor it is a case of discrimination in any manner.
In view of the above reasons, I do not find any merits in this writ petition and the same is hereby dismissed.
(PRAKASH TATIA), J.
S.Phophaliya