Punjab-Haryana High Court
Dr.Sat Pal Jindal vs State Of Punjab & Others on 23 August, 2010
Author: Permod Kohli
Bench: Permod Kohli
CWP No.20054 of 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH.
DATE OF DECISION: 23 .8.2010
Dr.Sat Pal Jindal ...Petitioner
VERSUS
State of Punjab & Others ...Respondents
CORAM
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE PERMOD KOHLI
PRESENT: Mr.Pankaj Jain, Advocate for petitioner
Ms.Kavita Arora, AAG, Punjab
Permod Kohli, J. (Oral)
The petitioner is doctorate in English having acquired Ph.D. Degree in English from Punjabi University, Patiala in the year 1995. The petitioner joined the Hindu College, Sonepat as Lecturer on 22.8.1979 and served upto 29.2.1980 against an aided post on ad hoc basis. Thereafter he joined as Lecturer on an aided post with Shaheed Kanshi Ram Memorial College, Bhagomajra, Tehsil Kharar w.e.f. 8.9.1980 on being selected by a duly constituted Selection Committee. He worked as Lecturer in English in the said school till 17.8.2004 and thereafter was placed in the selection grade of Rs.12000-18300 in accordance with the UGC guidelines with pay scale fixed at Rs.16,620/-, as is evident from Annexure P-2.
Respondent no.3 is another aided College run by respondent no.4. In CWP No.20054 of 2009 2 June 2004, respondent no.4 advertised a post of Lecturer in English in respondent no.3-College. The petitioner applied through proper channel. He was appointed vide appointment letter dt. 16.8.2004 by duly constituted Selection Committee. Respondent no.3-College is also aided College in the State of Punjab with 95% grant-in-aid provided by the Government. The petitioner represented for protection of his pay to respondent no.3. Respondent no.4, Managing Body adopted a resolution dated 5.7.2005 to recommend the case of the petitioner for pay protection to the DPI (C ), Punjab. Respondent no.2 sought clarification from respondent no.1 regarding the fixation of the pay of the petitioner at Rs.16620 vide memo dated 9.3.2006. Respondent no.2 vide the letter dated 20.2.2006 (Annexure P-7) fixed the pay of the petitioner at Rs.13500 as per Condition No.16 of 1995 grant-in-aid Scheme. It was also decided not to grant any annual increment, the pay fixed being last stage of the grade. The aforesaid order was modified vide another order dated 2.5.2007 stating therein that the pay of the petitioner is protected on new appointment w.e.f. 18.8.2004 on the basis of advice of pre-audited cell at Rs.13500/-. Aggrieved of the action of the respondents, the petitioner made a representation to respondent no.1 for fixation of his pay as per UGC guidelines vide his representation dated 27.12.2007 (Annexure P-8). Respondent no.2, however, rejected the representation of the petitioner vide memo dated 3.4.2008 (Annexure P-9). It was communicated that the guidelines of the UGC have not been implemented by the State because UGC is only recommendatory body. It is stated that the petitioner's case alongwith one Dr. Jagir Singh, Lecturer in Punjabi was again recommended for grant of senior scale by respondent no.3-College to the Government. Though the case of Dr.Jagir Singh was CWP No.20054 of 2009 3 cleared, but the petitioner's case was sent back asking the College to prepare the case as per new notification and send afresh. The petitioner has now filed this petition seeking a direction for quashing the impugned orders dated 2.5.2007 (Annexure P-7) and dated 3.4.2008 (Annexure P-9) with a further direction in the nature of Mandamus to refix the pay of the petitioner in senior scale as per his entitlement w.e.f. 18.8.2004.
In the reply filed, it is stated that under grant-in-aid Scheme, condition no.16 provides for protection of the pay of the employee when he joins afresh in another college. It is stated that the pay of the petitioner was correctly protected at the stage of Rs.13500 in the pay scale of Rs.8000- 13500. It is further stated that there is no stage of Rs.16620/- in the aforesaid pay scale. Respondents have also denied the averments made in the writ petition in respect of the alleged promise by the Management to protect his pay which he was receiving in the previous employment. It is, however, admitted that the Government has adopted the UGC guidelines issued vide letter dated 25.12.1998, subject to the conditions laid down in the letter. It is also the stand of the respondents that the petitioner had resigned from the previous employment and it being a fresh appointment, he is not entitled to the relief claimed.
I have heard counsel for the parties. Annexure P-11 is the government notification dated 24.3.1998 whereby the State of Punjab revised the pay scales of teaching personnel of the privately affiliated aided Colleges in the State of Punjab at par with University/Government colleges w.e.f. 1.1.1996 as issued vide government notification dated 20.2.99/ 10.3.99 and notification dated 12.3.1999.Govoernment notification dated 12.3.99 whereby the State Government adopted the pay pattern CWP No.20054 of 2009 4 recommended by the UGC reads as under:-
"Government of Punjab Department of Education (Education I Branch) In continuation to Punjab Government Notification No.10/22/98-5Edu 1/4257-69 dated 20.2.99 and substituted on 10.3.99 with same No. and date, the Governor of Punjab is pleased to amend and substitute the set of terms and conditions, prescribed for grant of revised pay scales of teaching/academic personnel of State Universities and Govt. Colleges in accordance with the pay pattern recommended by the University Grants Commission and accepted by the Government of India as consolidated by the University Grant Commission vide their notification No.F-3-1/94 (PS dated 24.12.1998 as per annexure I of this notification.
2.This issues with the occurrence of the Department of Finance conveyed vide their I.D. No.1/109/98-FP.1/dated 12.3.1999.
Dated, Chandigarh the G.P.S.Sahi, Principal Secretary to Govt. of Punjab, Department of higher education"
The UGC notified guidelines dated 24.12.1998 were to be adopted by all the Universities, states and U.Ts. These guidelines, inter-alia, includes the qualifications and other service conditions for the teachers and their pay scales. The Sceheme was to be adopted as composite Scheme without any CWP No.20054 of 2009 5 modification. The relevant condition 6.0 of the UGC guidelines is reproduced as under:-
"6.0 The University Grant Commission expects that the entire Scheme of revision of pay scales, together with all the conditions attached to it, would be implemented by the State Governments as a composite scheme without any modification, except the date of implementation and the scales of pay as indicated in Government of India notification No.F-1-22/97- U.I. dated 27.7.98, 22.9.98 and 6.11.98. It shall be necessary for the Universities and the management of Colleges to make the necessary changes in their statutes, ordinances, rules, regulations etc. to incorporate the provisions of this Scheme."
Notification dated 12.3.1999 reproduced here-in-above clearly indicates that these guidelines were adopted by the State. The UGC Scheme thus have been made applicable to the teachers of the State Government, Universities including the aided colleges. The UGC Scheme prescribes for the pay scales of Lecturers and also prescribes for counting of past service for the purpose of grant of senior scale and selection grade. Paragraph 8 of the UGC guidelines read as under:-
"8.0.0- COUNTING OF PAST SERVICE.
Previous service, without any break as a lecturer or equivalent, in a University, college, national laboratory, or other scientific organizations, e.g. CSIR, ICAR, DRDO, UGC, ICSSR, ICHR and a as CWP No.20054 of 2009 6 UGC Research Scientist, should be counted for placement of lecturer in Senior Scale/Selection Grade provided that:
8.l.0 The post was in an equivalent grad/scale of pay of the post of a Lecturer;
8.2.0 The qualifications for the post were not lower than the qualifications prescribed by the UGC for the post of Lecturer.
8.3.0 The candidates who apply for direct
recruitment should apply through proper
channels.
8.4.0 The concerned Lecturers possessed the minimum qualifications prescribed by the UGC for appointment as Lecturers 8.5.0 The post was filled in accordance with the prescribed selection procedure as laid down by the University/State Government/Central Government/Institution's regulations. 8.6.0 The appointment was not ad hoc or in a leave vacancy of less than one year duration ad hoc service of more than one year duration can be counted provided-
(a)the ad hoc service was of more than one year duration.
(b)The incumbent was appointed on the recommendation of duly constituted Selection CWP No.20054 of 2009 7 Committee, and
(c)The incumbent was selected to the permanent post in continuation to the ad hoc service, without any break."
The plea of the respondents that the petitioner is not entitled for pay protection or senior scale/selection grade, his appointment being fresh is contrary to the UGC Scheme duly adopted by the State Government vide its notification/order dated 12.3.1999 as a comprehensive scheme. The petitioner fulfills all the conditions contained in paragraph 8 of the UGC guidelines and thus his past service is to be counted for placement in Sr. scale/selection grade. Since petitioner was already in senior scale and was drawing salary of Rs.16620 as is evident from the letter dated 9.3.2006 (Annexure P-6), he is entitled to the protection of the said grade as a senior scale Lecturer.
In view of the above, this petition is allowed. Respondents are directed to fix the pay of the petitioner at Rs.16620 with effect from the date of his joining the respondent no.3-College i.e. 18.8.2004 within two months.
(PERMOD KOHLI) JUDGE 23 .8. 2010 MFK CWP No.10585 of 2010 8