Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4. Further, it is the case of the petitioner that vacancies are indeed available in the cadre of Professor in the abovesaid department in respect of the vacancies which have arisen for the period from 1.11.2017 to 1.5.2019.

Further, she would say that she has been duly included in the Field of Choice by the Department Promotion Committee (DPC) convened on 4.2.2019 for preparation of select list of eligible readers fit for promotion as Professor. It appears that though the petitioner has already secured the career advancement promotion scheme as Professor, she has not been granted regular promotion to the cadre of Professor. Further that, the original petitioner along with one Dr.B.Rithesh was duly considered by the DPC and as per Annexure-A7 proceedings dated 4.2.2019. The DPC has indeed prepared the select list including only one person therein,viz, the abovesaid Sri.B.Rithesh for further promotion in the cadre of Professor. It appears that the case is that the selection in the anticipated vacancies which will then due to arise on 1.5.2019 was deferred seeking clarification as to whether the UGC guidelines which required Performance Based Appraisal System (PBAS) and Academic Performance Indicators (API) would be applicable for further promotion.

15. Sri. K. Jaju Babu, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the original petitioner has urged various aspects on the merits of the matter and has also pointed out as an alternate submission that even going by the stipulations so far, the norms based on API and PBAS are applicable in the case of career Advancement Promotion Scheme and not necessarily for regular promotion in the cadre of Professor etc. Further that, if the matter is delayed and ultimately the competent authorities themselves decide that PBAS and API norms are applicable only for CAP promotion and not for regular cadre promotion, then any further delay would lead to a situation of serious and manifest injustice and inequity.