Karnataka High Court
Sri Madhav L Naik vs Director on 17 February, 2023
Author: B M Shyam Prasad
Bench: B M Shyam Prasad
-1-
WP No. 13589 of 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
DATED THIS THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 13589 OF 2021 (S-RES)
BETWEEN:
SRI MADHAV L NAIK
S/O LOKAPPA NAIK
AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS,
LIBRARIAN GRADE-1
SRI JAYADEVA INSTITUTION OF
CARDIOVASCULAR SCIENCES
AND RESEARCH
BANNERGHATTA ROAD
BENGALURU-560 069.
...PETITIONER
(BY SRI. MURTHY D. NAYAK, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SRI. JAYASHAM JAYASIMHA RAO.,ADVOCATE)
AND:
Digitally
signed by
NARASIMHA
MURTHY
1. DIRECTOR
VANAMALA SRI JAYADEVA INSTITUTE OF
Location:
HIGH CARDIOVASCULAR SCIENCES
COURT OF
KARNATAKA AND RESEARCH
BANNERGHATTA ROAD
BENGALURU-560 069.
2. THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION,
ESTABLISHED UNDER
THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION
ACT 1956, BAHADDUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG
-2-
WP No. 13589 of 2021
NEW DELHI - 110 002.
REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR.
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SRI.D.L. JAGADEESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR
SMT. RAKSHITHA D.J., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. C. SHASHIKANTHA, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE
226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO
QUASH THE ORDER DATED 30.01.2021 PASSED BY
THE RESPONDENT AT ANNEXURE-A; DIRECT THE
RESPONDENT TO CONTINUE PAYMENT OF SALARY, IN
TUNE WITH THE UGC PAY SCALE, TO WHICH THE
PETITIONER IS ENTITLE TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT
TO NOT DEDUCT ANY AMOUNT FROM THE MONTHLY
SALARY OF THE PETITIONER ILLEGALLY.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS
DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner, who is working as a Librarian Group-I with the first respondent, is aggrieved by the Official Memorandum dated 30.01.2021 [Annexure- A]. This impugned Official Memorandum is issued informing the petitioner that the UGC pay scale granted to him with effect from 01.12.2012 is withdrawn and he is admitted to the benefits of State pay scale as indicated therein. This Official Memorandum reads that the cause for withdrawal of -3- WP No. 13589 of 2021 UGC pay scale for the aforesaid period is the audit objection that the petitioner has not completed Ph.D. in Library Science and notwithstanding this, he is granted the benefit of UGC pay scale.
2. Sri. Murthy D. Nayak, the learned Senior Counsel who appears for Sri. Jayasham Jayasimha Rao who is on record for the petitioner, Sri. D.L.Jagadeesh, the learned Senior Counsel who appears for Smt.Rakshitha D.J. who is on record for the first respondent, and Sri. C. Shashikantha, the learned counsel for the second respondent - UGC, are heard for final disposal of the petition. UGC is impleaded as an additional respondent after this Court's order dated 10.08.2022.
3. The undisputed facts are that the petitioner was promoted as a Librarian Grade-1 in the year 2004 and even as of this date, the prescribed UGC guidelines was only master's degree in library science/documentation with 55% of marks and -4- WP No. 13589 of 2021 certain work experience, and crucially Ph.D. was indicated only as a desirable qualification and not an essential qualification1. These guidelines are revised, and fresh guidelines are issued in the year 2009. Again the educational qualification as aforesaid is reiterated but with the stipulation that the candidates shall be qualified in National Eligibility Test or upgraded tests/State Level Eligibility Test (SLET) in Library Science with exemption for those have Ph.D. decree.
4. When queried, Sri C.Shashikanth submits that the eligibility for grant of UGC pay scale should be decided on the basis of the date on which an 1 3.7.0: The Ph.D. should continue to be a compulsory requirement for the designation of Reader. However, for other categories, like those of Registrars, Librarians and Physical Education Directors, the Ph.D. should be a desirable and not an essential qualification.
(i) Librarian (University)
(i) Master's degree in library science/information science/documentation with at least 55% of the marks or its equivalent grade of B in the UGC seven point scale and consistently good academic record.
-5-WP No. 13589 of 2021 employee becomes entitled to such benefit, and if before the date of revision of guidelines, the concerned had the eligibility, he/she cannot be denied such benefit because of subsequent change in the guidelines. If the petitioner was promoted as Librarian Grade-1 in the year 2004 when Ph.D. was only a desirable qualification and neither NET or SLET was prescribed as a minimum qualification, the petitioner cannot be denied the benefit of UGC pay scale. The additional qualification of NET/ SLET is prescribed with exemption only later in the year 2009. This Court is also persuaded to opine that because the UGC pay scale is belatedly granted to the petitioner, he cannot be denied the benefit of UGC pay scale that he was entitled to on his promotion in the year 2004.
5. Sri D.L.Jagadeesh further submits that Annexure-A is issued because of the minimum qualification prescribed as of the year 2009. The -6- WP No. 13589 of 2021 Institution has reinstated UGC pay scale in the case of another who is issued with a similar order after he secured the requisite Ph.D. As such, this Court may not interfere with the impugned order and dispose of the petition with liberty to the petitioner to seek reinstatement of UGC pay scale on completion of Ph.D. decree. However, in the light of the afore discussion, this Court is of the considered view that even this ground cannot prevail. The petitioner must succeed, and the impugned order must yield. Hence, the following:
ORDER The petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 30.01.2021 [Annexure-A] is quashed directing the first respondent to reinstate UGC pay scale to the petitioner with all consequential benefits that the petitioner would be entitled to. The needful in this regard shall be done within -7- WP No. 13589 of 2021 twelve [12] weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
Sd/-
JUDGE SA ct:sr