Himachal Pradesh High Court
State Of Himachal Pradesh vs The Veterinary & Animal Sciences on 2 April, 2024
Bench: Mamidanna Satya Ratna Sri Ramachandra Rao, Jyotsna Rewal Dua
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA C.W.P. No. 3344 of 2020 Reserved on : 13.03.2024 Date of decision : 02.04.2024 .
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
State of Himachal Pradesh ..Petitioner
through Principal Secretary (Agriculture)
Versus
The Veterinary & Animal Sciences
Teachers' Association and another ..Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Coram :-
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice M.S. Ramachandra Rao, Chief Justice The Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge Whether approved for reporting?1 _________________________________________________________ For the Petitioner : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate General, with Mr. Pranay Pratap Singh, Additional Advocate General, Mr. Arsh Rattan & Mr. Sidharth Jalta, Deputy Advocates General.
For the Respondents : Mr. Ajay Sharma, Senior Advocate, with Mr. Atharv Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No.1 Mr. Naresh K. Sharma, Advocate, for respondent No. 2.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge State has assailed the judgment dated 17.06.2019 passed by the learned H.P. State Administrative Tribunal (in short the Tribunal) allowing the Original Application instituted by respondent 1 ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS 2 No. 1 association for grant of two "non-compounded advance increments" as incentive for its members' possessing M.V.Sc.
degree from respective dates (on or after 01.09.2008) with all .
consequential benefits).
2. Facts leading to institution of this writ appeal 2(i) The members of respondent No. 1 association were serving as Assistant Professors in respondent No. 2 Agricultural University. The case set up by them before the learned Tribunal was that :-
2(i) (a) to On 06.03.2009, following revision of pay scales of Central Government employees on recommendation of the 6 th Central Pay Commission, the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) revised the pay scales of Scientists working in its different institutions. This circular dated 06.03.2009 issued by the ICAR granted certain incentives for Scientists possessing higher qualifications. Respondent No. 1 laid emphasis on following clause providing incentives for specified higher qualifications :-
"4. Incentives for higher qualification 4.1 x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x 4.2 Candidates who hold M.Phil/M.Sc.(Ag.) / M.V.Sc. /M.F.Sc. degree (with 4 years bachelor and 2 years master's programme) at the time of recruitment on or after 01.09.2008 as Scientist shall be given two non- compounded advance increments........."::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS 3
Contention of respondent No. 1 was that in keeping with above circular, they being in possession of Masters degree of Veterinary Science (M.V.Sc.) were also entitled to two non .
compounded advance increments.
2(i) (b) The State of Himachal Pradesh issued a notification on 30.11.2009 releasing revised pay scales to the teaching/equivalent personnel of respondent no. 1 Agricultural University w.e.f.
01.01.2006. Annexure II appended alongwith this notification provided the revised pay scale, pay structure, eligibility, career advancement scheme and service conditions. In terms of clause 6 of Annexure II, incentives were provided for Ph.D./MPhil and other higher qualifications. The relevant portion of this clause highlighted by respondent No. 1 is as follows :-
"6. Incentives for Ph.D./M.Phil and other higher qualifications:
(i) x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x xx
(ii) M.Phil degree holders at the time of recruitment to the post of
Assistant Professor/equivalent shall be entitled to two non- compounded advance increments.
(iii) -( xvii) x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x"
The teaching faculty holding M.V.Sc. degree was not made eligible for two advance increments in lieu of their M.V.Sc.
degree as per the State notification, though M.Phil degree holders were entitled to the benefit for their M.Phil degree.
::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS 42(i) (c) Respondent No. 2 University issued a notification on 17.12.2009 whereby its Vice Chancellor exercising the powers vested in him under Section 25(7) of the University Act adopted the .
notification dated 30.11.2009 issued by the Government of Himachal Pradesh regarding revision of pay scale w.e.f. 01.01.2006 on ICAR pattern in respect of teaching/equivalent personnel of the University on the same terms and conditions as laid down in the notification.
The adoption was, however, made subject to ratification by the Board of Management of the University. The notification dated 17.12.2009 also stipulated that payment of salary in the revised pay scale would be made only as per approval of the Board of Management and after the receipt of funds from ICAR/State Government for the purpose.
2(i) (d) In view of aforesaid notifications dated 30.11.2009 issued by the State, as adopted by respondent No. 2 University on 17.12.2009, members of respondent No. 1 association were not granted two advance increments for their M.V.Sc. degrees. The repeated representations of respondent No. 1 did not bear any fruit for them, hence O.A. No. 2306 of 2016 was instituted by them before the learned Tribunal on 30.05.2016 praying for following substantive reliefs :-
::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS 5"(i) Respondents may kindly be directed to accept the recommendations of 6th Pay Commission mutatis mutandisas are forwarded by Indian Council of Agricuture & Research vide its letter dated 06.03.2009 and allow benefit of two non compounded advance increments to the members of the applicant association and accordingly fix their .
pay at the time of their appointments and grant further benefits in sequel thereto alongwith arrears of pay with interest @ 9% p.a.
(ii) That suitable directions may be issued to the respondents to add illegally omitted portion wherever the same was omitted i.e. either by respondent No. 2 or respondent No. 1 in its internal communications and alongwith M.Phil add M.Tech/M.Sc. (Agr.)/MVSC/MFSC, a condition precedent for the grant of two non compounded advance increments in respondent No. 2 University." 2(ii) The gist of stand of the State Government was that recommendations/instructions issued by the ICAR/UGC are not ipso-facto applicable to respondent No. 2 State Agricultural University unless the same are approved by the State Government.
The State Government has not approved two non-compounded advance increments to the Assistant Professors holding M.V.Sc.
degree in the pay scales notified for the teaching faculty in the Agricultural University vide notification dated 30.11.2009. The notification issued by the State has been adopted and notified by respondent No. 2 University on 17.12.2009, therefore, respondent No. 1 was not entitled for the relief claimed by it.
2(iii) Learned Tribunal allowed the O.A. on 17.06.2019.
Two non-compounded advance increments were ordered to be released to the members of respondent No.1 association from ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS 6 respective due dates primarily on the ground that in the matter of pay scales, the State Government follows pay pattern of State of Punjab.
The counter parts of respondent No. 1 have been getting two non-
.
compounded advance increments for M.V.Sc. degree in Punjab Agriculture University in terms of ICAR notification dated 06.03.2009. Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences University, Ludhiana (Punjab) also follows the pay scales of State of Punjab. The ICAR is the regulatory authority in the field of Veterinary and Animal Sciences. When the ICAR has approved grant of two non-compounded advance increments for its Scientists holding Masters degree in Veterinary Sciences at the time of recruitment on or after 01.09.2008, when this pattern has been followed in the State of Punjab, there is no reason for the State of Himachal Pradesh and respondent No. 2 Agricultural University for not approving and releasing the same benefit to the Assistant Professors of respondent No. 2 Agricultural University holding M.V.Sc. degree, more particularly when State of Himachal Pradesh follows Punjab pattern of pay-scales for its employees.
2(iv) The State has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the aforesaid decision.
::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS 73. Learned counsel on both sides reiterated their respective pleaded case. Learned Senior counsel for respondent No. 1 endeavoured to defend the impugned order of the learned Tribunal .
and learned Advocate General made submission for its setting aside.
4. Consideration Having heard the rival submissions and on consideration of the case file, our observations are as under :-
4(i) It is an admitted factual position that ICAR vide its circular dated 06.03.2009 had revised the pay scale of its Scientists following the revision of pay scale of Central Government employees on the recommendations of 6th Pay Commission. The circular provided incentives for Scientists possessing higher qualifications. The candidates holding M.Phil/M. Tech./M.Sc.
(Ag.)/M.V.Sc./M.F.Sc. degree (with four years' Bachelor and two years' Masters Programme) at the time of recruitment on or after 01.09.2008 were to be given two non-compounded advance increments.
4(ii) The case of respondent No. 1 is that the incentives granted in the circular of ICAR to the candidates holding different degrees, including that of M.V.Sc., are liable to be released by the State Government/respondent No. 2 University and, therefore, members of respondent No. 1 association are also to be released two ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS 8 non-compounded advance increments for M.V.Sc. degree possessed by them. However, during hearing of the case, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No. 1 could not point out any provision in .
the Statute, Rules, Regulations, Notifications, Circulars, to the effect that the incentives approved by ICAR for its Scientists in different institutes are ipso-facto binding upon the State Government or that the incentives being released by the ICAR to its Scientists in its different institutes are to be straightaway given by the State to its teaching faculty in the respondent Agricultural University. In fact, no such submission was made before us.
On the contrary, the State pointed out a notification dated 31.12.2008 issued by the Government of India (Ministry of Human Resources Development) Department of Higher Education regarding revision of pay of teachers and equivalent cadre in the Universities and Colleges following the revision of pay scales of Central Government employees on the recommendation of 6th Central Pay Commission. Clause (p) thereof was pressed into service to contend that it is not mandatory for the State to follow the scheme. The provision is as follows :-
"(p) Applicability of the Scheme
(i) - (iv) x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x
(v) This Scheme may be extended to universities, Colleges and other higher educational institutions coming under the purview of State Legislatures, ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS 9 provided State Governments wish to adopt and implement the Scheme subject to the following terms and conditions :-
(a) Financial assistance from the Central Government to State Governments opting to revise pay scales of teachers and other equivalent cadre covered under the Scheme shall be limited to the extent of 80% .
(eighty percent) of the additional expenditure involved in the implementation of the revision.
(b) The State Government opting for revision of pay shall meet the remaining 20% (twenty percent) of the additional expenditure from its own sources.
(c) Financial Assistance referred to in sub-clause (a) above shall be provided for the period from 01.01.2005 to 31.03.2010.
(d) The entire liability on account of revision of pay scales etc. of university and college teachers shall be taken over by the State Government opting for opting for revision of pay scales with effect from 01.04.2010.
(e) Financial assistance from the Central Government shall be restricted to revision of pay scales in respect of only those posts which were in existence and had been filled up as on 01.01.2006.
(f) State Government, taking into consideration other local conditions, may also decide in their discretion, to introduce scales of pay higher than those mentioned in this Scheme, and may give effect to the revised bands/scales of pay from a date on or after 01.01.2006; however, in such cases, the details of modifications proposed shall be furnished to the Central Government and Central assistance shall be restricted to the Pay Bands as approved by the Central Government and not to any higher scale of pay fixed by the State Government(s).
(g) Payment of Central assistance for implementing this Scheme is also subject to the condition that the entire Scheme of revision of pay scales, together with all the conditions to be laid down by the UGC by way of Regulations and other guidelines shall be implemented by State Governments and Universities and Colleges coming under their jurisdiction as a composite scheme without any modification except in regard to the date of implementation and scales of pay mentioned herein above."
::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS 10Respondent No. 1 has neither contended nor established before us that the incentives approved by ICAR for its Scientists are ipso-facto applicable to the teaching faculty of respondent No. 2 .
State Agricultural University. Reliance placed by the State on the circular dated 31.12.2008 issued by the Ministry of Human Resources Development assumes significance which provides for extension of the scheme for payment of revised scale to Universities under purview of State after its adoption. It is not the case of respondent No. 1 that the State or respondent N. 2 University has ever approved release of two non-compounded advance increments for incumbents holding M.V.Sc. degree. That being the position, respondent No.1's claim on two advance increments for M.V.Sc.
degree is misplaced. The State Government under its notification dated 30.11.2009 has not approved the recommendations of the ICAR for grant of incentives to faculty holding M.V.Sc. degrees.
4(iii) We may also notice here that after the issuance of circular dated 06.03.2009 of the ICAR and the notification dated 30.11.2009 by the State in respect of release of revised pay scales and incentives, respondent No. 2 University had adopted the notification dated 30.11.2009 issued by the State. The logical conclusion is that two advance increments approved by the ICAR for its Scientists ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS 11 holding M.V.Sc. degree were not approved by the State & this decision was accepted by respondent No. 2 Agricultural University.
4(iv) Further argument raised for respondent No. 1 is that .
respondent-State has approved two advance increments incentive for M.Phil degree holders whereas in field of Agricultural Science, this degree is not prevalent, therefore, incumbents holding M.V.Sc.
degree should be granted the benefit. Strong emphasis has also been laid upon grant of advance increments to incumbents holding M.V.Sc. degree by the State of Punjab.
Merely because Agricultural Universities in the State of Punjab have released two advance increments to its faculty possessing M.V.Sc. degree would not mean that respondent State is obligated to do the same. What happens in the State of Punjab in respect of release of pay-scales/incentives is not to be automatically implemented by the State of Himachal Pradesh. The respondents-
State has to examine the matter of release of pay-scale/incentives in view of its own staffing pattern, Recruitment & Promotion Rules, method of recruitment, educational qualifications, geographical /traditional/territorial conditions and financial resources etc. The Government of Himachal Pradesh is not legally bound to follow the Punjab pay-scale pattern.
::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS 12It will also be apposite to refer here to (1999) 3 SCC 217 (State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. P.D. Attri and others), wherein the Apex Court held that even if the State of Himachal Pradesh as .
per policy & practice had been adopting pay-scales for its employees as sanctioned from time to time by State of Punjab and Haryana, yet State of Himachal Pradesh is not bound to follow it or if it had adopted rules and regulations applicable to employees of other State even then it is not bound to follow every change brought in the rules and regulations in the other State. Every State has its own individualistic way of governance under the Constitution. No law commands it to follow pay-scales granted by any other State.
Relevant paras from the judgment are extracted hereinafter:-
"5. The Case of the respondents is not based on any Constitutional or any other legal provisions when they claim parity with the posts similarly designated in the Punjab and Haryana High court and their pay-scales from the same date. They do not allege any violation of any Constitutional provision or any other provision of law. They say it is so because of "accepts policy and common practice" which according to them are undisputed. We do not think we can import such vague principles while interpreting the provisions of law. India is a union of States. Each State has its own individualistic way of governance under the Constitution. One State is not bound to follow the rules and regulations applicable to the employees of the other State or if it had adopted the same rules and regulations, it is not bound to follow every change brought in the rules and regulations in the other State. The question then arises before us is if the State of Himachal Pradesh has to follow every change brought in the States of Punjab and Haryana in regard to the rules and regulations ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS 13 applicable to the employees in the States of Punjab and Haryana. The answer has to be in negative. No argument is needed for that as anyone having basic knowledge of the Constitution would not argue otherwise, True, the State as per "policy and practice' had been adopting the same pay-scales for the employees of the High court as sanctioned from time to .
time for the employees of the Punjab and Haryana High court and it may even now follow to grant pay-scales but is certainly not bound to follow. No law commands it to do so.
6. The State of Punjab was reorganised into States of Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh. Chandigarh, to begin with, was a Union Territory and was given the status of full Statehood in 1970. Since employees of the composite States of Punjab were taken in various Departments of the State of Himachal Pradesh in order to safeguard the seniority, pay-scales etc. , the State of Himachal Pradesh followed the Punjab pattern of payscales. After attaining the status of full statehood, High court of Himachal Pradesh formulated its own rules and regulations for its employees. It adopted the pattern of Punjab and Haryana High court rules of their employees. When Punjab and Haryana High court gave effect to certain portion of its Rules from 25/9/1985 by notification dated 23/1/1986 as a result of which redesignation of the posts of Senior Translators and Junior Translators were equated to the posts in Punjab Civil Secretariat, in the Himachal Pradesh High court similar effect was given to in its rules for its employees. When the Punjab and Haryana High court gave effect to those rules from 23/1/1975, the State government did not agree to the recommendations of the chief justice of the Himachal Pradesh High court to follow the same suit. It is true that till now, Himachal Pradesh High court has been following the rules applicable to the employees of the Punjab and Haryana High court and it may go on following those rules as may be amended by the punjab and Haryana High court from time to time, but certainly it is not bound to so follow. No law commands the State government to follow the rules applicable to the employees of the Punjab and Haryana High court to the employees of the Himachal Pradesh High court. That being the position, it is not necessary for us to examine different qualifications for appointment to the posts of Translators and ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS 14 Junior Translators that may exist between Punjab and Haryana High court and the Himachal Pradesh High court and also as to the mode of their recruitment/placement in the service. Moreover, any change in the payscale following Punjab and Haryana High court can set in motion chain reaction for other employees which may give rise to multiplicity of .
litigation among various categories of employees. Rules of each High court have to be examined independently. There cannot be any such law that Himachal Pradesh High court has to suo motu follow the same rules as applicable to the employees working in the Punjab and Haryana High Court".
In this petition, we are not even concerned with release of revised pay-scale, but the admissibility of two non-compounded advance increments as incentive to the members of respondent No. 1 association in lieu of their M.V. Sc. Degree. As noticed earlier, neither there is any material on record to suggest that the State or respondent No. 2 are bound to release the increments that are released by the ICAR nor any submission on this point was advanced by learned Senior Counsel for respondent No. 1.
Respondent No.1's stand alone ground of State of Himachal Pradesh/respondent No. 2 University being mandatorily bound to follow the State of Punjab pattern of pay-scales/incentives, is untenable.
5. Conclusion For the foregoing reasons, decision of learned Tribunal directing the appellant & respondent No. 2 University to release two non-compounded advance increments to the members of respondent ::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS 15 No. 1 University as incentive for their possessing M.V. Sc. Degree, cannot be sustained. There is merit in this appeal. The same is allowed. The impugned judgment dated 17.06.2019 passed by the .
learned erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 2306 of 2016 is set aside. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.
M.S. Ramachandra Rao
Chief Justice
nd
2 April, 2024 (K)
r to Jyotsna Rewal Dua
Judge
::: Downloaded on - 02/04/2024 20:35:38 :::CIS