Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Karnataka High Court

Dr Smt M C Chalawadi vs The Registrar on 28 February, 2024

Author: Shivashankar Amarannavar

Bench: Shivashankar Amarannavar

                                                               -1-
                                                                      NC: 2024:KHC-D:4644
                                                                           WP No. 85841 of 2013




                                               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
                                                       DHARWAD BENCH

                                          DATED THIS THE 28TH DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2024

                                                             BEFORE

                                    THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SHIVASHANKAR AMARANNAVAR

                                           WRIT PETITION NO. 85841 OF 2013 (S-RES)

                                   BETWEEN:

                                   DR. SMT. M.C. CHALAWADI,
                                   AGED ABOUT
                                   ASSOCIATE PROFESSOR IN SOCIOLOGY,
                                   KARNATAKA ARTS COLLEGE,
                                   DHARWAD.

                                                                                   ... PETITIONER
                                   (BY SRI. SANTOSH B. MANE, ADVOCATE)

                                   AND:

                                   THE REGISTRAR,
                                   KARNATAKA UNIVERSITY,
                                   DHARWAD.
                                                                                  ... RESPONDENT
                                   (BY SRI. GIRISH S. HULMANI, ADVOCATE)

VIJAYALAKSHMI
M KANKUPPI
                Digitally signed
                by
                VIJAYALAKSHMI
                M KANKUPPI
                                         THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227
                Date: 2024.03.01
                11:08:11 +0530
                                   OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT IN
                                   THE NATURE OF CERTIORARI AND QUASH THE COMMUNICATION
                                   DATED 03.05.2013 BEARING NO. KU/DPAR/T/2013/577 VIDE
                                   ANNEXURE-D ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITY AND
                                   DIRECT THE RESPONDENT AUTHORITY TO CONSIDER THE CLAIM OF
                                   THE PETITIONER BY CONSIDERING THE REPRESENTATION DATED
                                   18.03.2013 VIDE ANNEXURE-C AND TO TAKE NECESSARY STEPS TO
                                   EXTEND THE BENEFIT OF THREE ADDITIONAL INCREMENTS FOR
                                   HAVING COMPETED HER PH.D. DEGREE AND ALSO TO REVISE THE
                                   PAY OF THE PETITIONER.

                                       THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE
                                   COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
                                -2-
                                      NC: 2024:KHC-D:4644
                                         WP No. 85841 of 2013




                             ORDER

The prayer made in this petition is to quash the communication bearing No.KU/DPAR/T/2013/577 dated 03.05.2013 (Annexure-D) issued by the respondent and also direction is sought to consider the claim of the petitioner made in her representation dated 18.03.2013 vide Annexure-C and to take necessary steps to extend benefit of three additional increments for having completed her Ph.D. degree and to revise the pay of the petitioner.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the respondent.

3. The petitioner was working as a lecturer on temporary basis on consolidated pay in the Department of Sociology in Karnataka Arts College, Dharwad. As per order of the Hon'ble Apex Court and this court, the service conditions of the petitioner came to be regularized along with others with effect from 06.07.1994 as lecturer.

4. At the time of regularization, the petitioner was not possessing the Ph.D. degree. It is the contention of -3- NC: 2024:KHC-D:4644 WP No. 85841 of 2013 the learned counsel for the respondent that Ph.D. degree was a requisite qualification.

5. He also contended that while issuing the terms and conditions of service vide office order dated 10.11.1994, the petitioner was informed that she should obtain Ph.D. degree within five years from the date of regularization as regular lecturer. Failing which future increments will be stopped till she obtains Ph.D. degree. The said office order dated 10.11.1994 is at Annexure-R2.

6. The claim of the petitioner is for three additional increments as she has acquired Ph.D. degree. The said claim came to be negatived by the respondent by issuing the communication dated 03.05.2013 (Annexure- D).

7. In Annexure-D, it is stated that Ph.D. decree is an essential qualification and therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to advance increments. In the said Annexure- D, there is a reference to Clause-XXV of Appendix-IV of Government Order No.ED 37 UNE 2009 dated 24.12.2009. The said Government Order is at Annexure-E. -4- NC: 2024:KHC-D:4644 WP No. 85841 of 2013

8. Clause XXV of the Appendix-IV of the said Government Order (Annexure-E) reads as under;

"(xxv)The advance increments shall not be admissible to teachers, who were recruited/promoted to a post for which Ph.D. was an essential qualification."

9. Clause 7(viii) of Annexure-P reads thus;

"(viii) As from 11-07-2009 the teaching staffs who have not acquired the qualification prescribed by the UGC are not entitled for availing the benefit of UGC revised scheme unless they acquire NET/SLET/Ph.D. through course work and that no M.Phil shall be recognized thereafter until then they shall continue to be in the pre-

revised UGC scale or in the State pay scale as the case may be."

10. The petitioner was promoted as Lecturer Selection Grade with effect from 06.07.2012 under UGC Carrier Advancement Scheme. The petitioner was re-designated as Associate Professor with effect from 06.07.2008, after completion of 3 years of service as a -5- NC: 2024:KHC-D:4644 WP No. 85841 of 2013 Selection Grade Lecturer by office order dated 06.05.2010. The petitioner was not holding Ph.D., Decree as on 06.07.2008. The said aspect pre-supposes that, to hold the post of Associate Professor as on 06.07.2008, the Ph.D., Decree was not required.

11. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner was enrolled for Ph.D on 10.11.2006, which is stated in Serial No.2 of Annexure-A. He, by referring to Clause 1(v) and (vi) of Appendix-IV of Annexure-E contends that, a Teacher, who is having been enrolled for Ph.D have already undergone course as well as evaluation are entitled to 3 non-compounded increments, if only notification in regard to award Ph.D is awaited. The said Clause 1(v) and (vi) of Appendix-IV reads as under;

"(v) However, teachers in service who have been awarded Ph.D. at the time of coming into force of this Scheme or having been enrolled for Ph.D. have already undergone course-work, if any, as well as evaluation, and only notification in regard to the -6- NC: 2024:KHC-D:4644 WP No. 85841 of 2013 award of Ph.D. is awaited, shall also be entitled to the award of three non-

compounded increments even if the university awarding such Ph.D. has not yet been notified by the UGC as having complied with the process prescribed by the Commission.

(vi) In respect of every other case, a teacher who is already enrolled for Ph.D. shall avail the benefit of three non-

compounded increments only if the university awarding the Ph.D. has been notified by the UGC to have complied with the process prescribed by the Commission for the award of Ph.D., in respect of either course-work or evaluation or both, as the case may be."

12. Necessary materials have not been placed before this Court to ascertain whether, the petitioner has undergone course work as well as evaluation and only notification in regard to award a Ph.D is awaited. The said aspect has not been considered by the respondent while rejecting the claim of the petitioner made in Annexure-C vide Annexure-D. -7- NC: 2024:KHC-D:4644 WP No. 85841 of 2013

13. In view of the above communication dated 03.05.2013, Annexure-D requires to be quashed, directing the respondent to consider the representation of the petitioner (Annexure-C) afresh, taking into consideration Circulars, Government Orders, UGC Carrier Advancement Scheme and other necessary records.

14. In view of the above, the communication dated 03.05.2013 bearing No.KU/DPAR/T/2013/577 vide Annexure-D issued by respondent is quashed and respondent is directed to consider the claim of the petitioner made in his representation dated 18.03.2013 (Annexure-C) afresh by considering observations as made above.

The respondent is granted 8 weeks time to consider afresh representation at Annexure-C. Sd/-

JUDGE HMB-Upto para 8 PJ- Para 9 to end.

CT:BCK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 39