Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Sh. N.C. Goel vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi Through on 9 April, 2013
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench, New Delhi.
OA-1622/2012
With
OA-1827/2012
Reserved on: 02.04.2013.
Pronounced on:09.04.2013.
Honble Mr. G. George Paracken, Member (J)
Honble Mr. Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A)
OA-1622/2012
Sh. N.C. Goel,
S/o Mr. Damodar Dass,
R/o D-9, Delhi Govt. Flats,
Timar Pur, Delhi. . Applicant
(through Sh. Sourabh Ahuja, Advocate)
Versus
1. Govt. of NCT of Delhi through
Its Chief Secretary,
Delhi Sachivalaya,
I.P. Estate, New Delhi-2.
2. Secretary
(Technical Education)
Department of Training & Technical Education,
GNCT of Delhi,
Muni Maya Ram Marg,
Pitam Pura, Delhi-88.
3. Mr. S.V. Vagheesha,
Deputy Director (E-I),
(Member Secretary, Selection/Screening
Committee), Dept. of Training & Technical
Education, GNCT of Delhi, Muni Maya Ram
Marg, Pitam Pura, Delhi-88.
4. Ms. Arti Kapoor
(Joint Director (Tech.))
(Secretary, Selection/Screening Committee)
Department of Training & Technical Education,
GNCT of Delhi, Muni Maya Ram Marg,
Pitam Pura, Delhi-88.
5. The Principal,
Pusa Polytechnic,
Directorate of Training & Technical Education,
New Delhi.
6. All India Council for Technical Education
Through its Secretary,
7th Floor, Chanderlok Building,
Janpath, New Delhi. . Respondents
(through Sh. B.N.P. Pathak, Advocate)
OA-1827/2012
Sh. K.K. Prasad,
s/o late Sh. Shivaprasana Prasad,
R/o 1347-A/13, GF, Govindpuri,
Near Petrol Punp, PO Kalkaji,
Delhi. . Applicant
(through Sh. Sourabh Ahuja, Advocate)
Versus
1. Govt. of NCT of Delhi through
Its Chief Secretary,
Delhi Sachivalaya,
I.P. Estate, New Delhi-2.
2. Secretary
(Technical Education)
Department of Training & Technical Education,
GNCT of Delhi,
Muni Maya Ram Marg,
Pitam Pura, Delhi-88.
3. Mr. S.V. Vagheesha,
Deputy Director (E-I),
(Member Secretary, Selection/Screening
Committee), Dept. of Training & Technical
Education, GNCT of Delhi, Muni Maya Ram
Marg, Pitam Pura, Delhi-88.
4. Ms. Arti Kapoor
(Joint Director (Tech.))
(Secretary, Selection/Screening Committee)
Department of Training & Technical Education,
GNCT of Delhi, Muni Maya Ram Marg,
Pitam Pura, Delhi-88.
5. The Principal,
Pusa Polytechnic,
Directorate of Training & Technical Education,
New Delhi.
6. All India Council for Technical Education
Through its Secretary,
7th Floor, Chanderlok Building,
Janpath, New Delhi. . Respondents
(through Sh. B.N.P. Pathak, Advocate)
O R D E R
Mr. Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A) The two O.As are inter-connected, hence these are being disposed of by this common order.
2. For the sake of convenience, facts of OA-1622/2012 are being discussed below:-
2.1 The applicant has sought the following relief:-
(a) Direct the respondents to consider the name of the Applicant for grant of Selection Grade w.e.f. 30/06/2009 and if the Applicant is declared fit then he should be granted selection grade w.e.f. 30/06/2009 with all consequential benefits viz. arrears of salary, promotion, seniority etc.
(b) Award cost in favour of the Applicant and against the respondents. And /or (C) Pass any further order, which this Honble Tribunal may deem fit, just equitable in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2.2 The applicant was appointed as Lecturer (Physics) on 30.06.1998. He was granted Senior Scale on 30.06.2004 in terms of AICTE Notification dated 30.12.1999. According to the applicant he became due for grant of selection grade w.e.f. 30.06.2009 since he possesses all the requisite qualifications prescribed under the extant rules, AICTE Notification dated 30.12.1999. He has claimed that his record of service is also satisfactory since he has never been communicated any adverse ACR nor has been ever punished. According to his belief, his ACRs are also either outstanding or very good. The applicant preferred various representations to the respondents with the request to convene the meeting of the Selection Committee for grant of selection grade to him. The respondents held a selection/screening committee on 10.10.2011 in which the selection grade was not granted to the applicant. Aggrieved by the same, he has filed this O.A. before us.
2.3 The applicants counsel has argued that the applicant is fully eligible as per the AICTE Notification for grant of selection grade w.e.f. 30.06.2009 with all consequential benefits of salary, promotion and seniority. He has all the essential qualifications, namely, M.Sc (Physics) i.e. Masters degree with first division and 5 years regular service as Lecturer (Senior Scale) as mandated in the aforesaid AICTE Notification. He has contended that the Selection Committee was misguided by certain officers of the department to believe that Ph.D is an essential qualification for grant of such selection grade and on account of this misinformation the applicant was left out. The respondents have been adopting dilatory tactics by sending letters to AICTE for obtaining certain clarifications though the AICTE Notification is unambiguous and clear that only Masters Degree is essential qualification for grant of selection grade. He has alleged that AICTE has not provided answers to these clarifications. He has also alleged that one Mr. Ramesh Chander was granted selection grade w.e.f. 16.12.2001 although he possesses the same qualification as the applicant. His claim is that in order to extend benefit to Mr. Ramech Chander, the respondents have altered the essential qualification which is Masters Degree to M. Phil. According to him, this is total misinterpretation of the extant instructions and the conduct of the respondents is absolutely whimsical, arbitrary and in violation of the principles of natural justice.
3. Respondents No. 1 to 5, on the other hand, in their reply have denied the allegations of the applicant. According to them, they have sought a clarification from AICTE whether Lecturers possessing M.Sc can be granted this grade. The clarification from AICTE is still awaited despite several reminders. Regarding Mr. Ramesh Chander, the respondents have stated that he was granted selection grade in the meeting held on 09.01.2006 vide order dated 20.04.2006 on the basis of his M.Phil Degree. However, that case is under review of the competent authority. The contention of the respondents is that none of the Lecturers possessing Masters Degree in Humanities and Science have been granted selection grade for want of clarification from AICTE. They have further stated that essential qualification for Lecturers in engineering discipline is B.Tech and B.E. and they have been granted selection grade after acquiring Masters Degree in engineering.
4. We have heard both sides and perused the material placed on record.
5. Our attention has been drawn to Para-8 of the AICTE Notification dated 30.12.1999, which is relevant for our purpose. This para deals with career advancement and provides for grant of Senior Scale to Lecturers and Selection Grade to Senior Scale Lecturers. Para-8.3 of this Notification deals with the qualifications required for grant of selection grade. It reads as follows:-
8.3 Lecturer (Selection Grade):
A Senior Lecturer/Lecturer (Senior Scale) who has a Masters degree and 5 years experience as Senior Lecturer or Lecturer (Senior Scale), and has consistently, satisfactory performance appraisal reports will be eligible to be placed as Lecturer (Selection Grade), subject to the recommendation of the Selection Committee. A mere reading of this para makes it clear that Masters Degree with 5 years satisfactory service as Senior Lecturer is sufficient for grant of selection grade. It appears that the respondents No. 1 to 5 in their wisdom have though that Masters in Humanities and Science cannot be equated to Masters in engineering discipline and have, therefore, sought clarification from the AICTE. It is unfortunate that neither the AICTE has responded nor have the respondents No. 1 to 5 done anything to expedite the case. Consequently, the applicant has been suffering.
6. AICTE, who is respondent No. 6, have filed their reply in which they have stated that as per Section-10 of the AICTE Act, it shall be the duty of the Council to take all such steps, as it may think fit for ensuring coordinated and integrated development of technical and management education and maintenance of standards. Section-23 of the same Act confers powers on the Council to make regulations generally to carry out the purposes of the AICTE Act, 1987. Respondent No. 6 have stated that in due discharge of their duties, the AICTE has been issuing Notifications/Regulations from time to time prescribing pay scale/salary structure, qualifications, conditions of service including staff pattern & structure etc. of Technical Institutions. Further, they have stated that AICTE vide its letter dated 30.12.1999 informed the Secretaries dealing with technical education of all State Governments and Union Territories regarding recommendations of AICTE pertaining to revision of pay scales, qualifications and service conditions of teachers of technical institutions (diploma). With the aforesaid letter of AICTE, AICTE Notification on revision of pay scales and terms & conditions of service of teachers etc. was also circulated. Clause-5 of the said Notification prescribed the qualifications for various teaching posts in diploma level Technical Institutions. The said Notification also states that where qualification and experience for a post is higher than the qualifications and experience prescribed by AICTE prior to this revision, the revised qualifications and experience will be required only for fresh appointees to that post and will not be insisted on for existing incumbents. Further, respondent No.5 have stated that teachers already in service prior to January 1996 who at the time of their recruitment possess only a second class in their degree at Bachelors or Masters degree shall be exempted from the requirement of first class Degree. Clause 8.3 of the said Notification deals with conditions for grant of selection grade to the lecturers and prescribes Masters Degree and five years experience as Senior Lecturer as necessary conditions for grant of selection grade. Respondent No. 5 have gone to state that to deal with various clarifications being sought by State Government, an Expert Committee had been constituted by the AICTE and based on their recommendations, clarifications have been circulated. As far as GNCTD is concerned clarifications regarding grant of selection grades to Lecturers of Polytechnics of Delhi Government were issued to them vide AICTE letter No. RIFD/DTTE(DLH)/2011-12 dated 18.10.2012. In the said letter, clarification given on the point of grant of selection grade to Lecturers has been dealt with as follows:-
Clarification sought:
d) In 1999 Guideline, it is mentioned that A Senior Lecturer (Senior Scale) who has a Masters Degree and 5 years experience as Senior Lecturer or Lecturer (Senior Scale) and has satisfactorily performance appraisal report will be eligible to be placed as lecturer (Selection Grade) subject to the recommendations of the Selection Committee. It can be clarified whether it refers to Masters Degree in Engg./Techonology or Masters Degree other than Engg. Is treated equivalent to Bachelors Degree in Engg. & Technology? (Reference self Contained Note 4) Clarification:
It is clarified that maters degree in any other field other than engineering is not equivalent to Bachelors Degree in Engineering and Technology except where specified by the statutory authority for the cases in reference. So, while placements are made, this fact may be noted. From the above, it is clear that AICTE have failed to provide unambiguous clarification to the question sought by the GNCTD. Thus, while they have said that Post Graduate Degree in fields other than engineering is not equivalent to Bachelors Degree in engineering, they have not categorically stated that Masters Degree in Humanities and Science can be regarded as sufficient for grant of selection grade.
7. We have seen Clause 8.3 of the Notification dealing with the clarifications for selection grade of lecturers. It unambiguously mentions Masters Degree as required qualification. There is no mention of Masters in engineering, science, arts or humanities in the said provision. A lecturer in Science or humanities will obviously have degree in his own subject. If the intention of the Notification was not to treat this degree sufficient for grant of selection grade then the same should have been provided in Clause-8.3. Since no such provision is there, it is reasonable to assume that Masters degree in discipline the lecturer is working in would be sufficient educational qualification for grant of selection grade.
8. Moreover, in their rejoinder the applicants have cited cases of lecturers who have been granted selection grade by GNCTD though they possess only MA degree in humanities. One such document has been attached as Annexure-12 to the rejoinder dated 13.12.2010 which has been obtained under the RTI Act, 2005, and according to which one Sh. R.S. Dey, Lecturer has been granted selection grade w.e.f. 02.02.2007 although he possess MA degree in Drawing and Painting only. In the same document one Sh. Ashok N. Ninawe, Lecturer has also been granted selection grade w.e.f. 11.01.2006. He also possessed the same qualification. The order of the Lt. Governor of NCTD granting the selection grade has also been annexed. Another document obtained under RTI Act, 2005 reads as follows:-
Information under RTI Act, 2005, against the application of Shri H.R. Meena (ID-815).
Reference PIO letter dated 21/08/2012 on the aforementioned subject matter, the reply is as under:
The following Lecturers, having Masters Degree in Applied Sciences & Humanities, have been granted Selection Grade under Career Advancement Scheme.
Shri D.V. Chaure, Lecturer, Applied Phy. Dept. (Since retd. On voluntary basis) Shri S.G. Warker, Lecturer, Applied Chemistry Dept. As desired, copies of relevant Orders (dated 24/03/2006 and 30/09/2011) are enclosed herewith.
9. On the basis of the above, we come to the conclusion that the respondents have clearly erred in not considering the case of the applicant for grant of selection grade from their respective dates of eligibility. The O.A. succeeds and we direct the respondents to consider the applicant for grant of selection grade from the date of eligibility in terms of AICTE Notification dated 30.12.1999 taking their Masters degree in their respective subjects to be sufficient educational qualification for the grant of this grade. This process will be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.
10. A copy of this order be placed in OA-1827/2012.
(Shekhar Agarwal) (G. George Paracken) Member (A) Member (J) /Vinita/