Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4: Heard learned Senior counsel Shri Rajendra Tiwari and Shri L.C. Patne for petitioners and Shri R.D. Jain, learned Advocate General and Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, learned counsel for interveners and perused the record.

5: The controversy in both the petitions boils round, the question whether the petitioners are to be treated as full fledged Professor said to be working in Higher Education Department of Government of Madhya Pradesh or not, and whether in terms of the revision of pay Scheme made by the UGC, the petitioners would be entitled to grant of a higher rate of AGP or not ? Since the Scheme was formulated by the UGC, giving benefit of revision of pay with effect from 1.1.2006, and the said Scheme has been made applicable, after its becoming a part of the Regulations of the UGC, by the State of M.P., whether the departure from the said Scheme is permissible or not ? And lastly whether the UGC has prescribed the pay bands according to the nomenclature of the posts or on the basis of pre-revised pay scales applicable to the posts ?

12 : Now the other issue is required to be considered, whether the UGC has prescribed the pay bands for revision of pay on the basis of pre-revised pay scale or not, and whether the intention of UGC is to give a particular pay band with AGP on different rates as per the nomenclature of post or not ? It is to be seen that the object of the instructions contained in the Schemes Annx.P/2 in the writ petition is fulfilled, already in advance by the State by prescribing a post which could be designated as post of Associate Professor. Why this is held so because in the Scheme of the UGC different pay scales are prescribed for different posts. The post of Assistant Professor formally known as Lecturer in the senior scale which were given the pay scale of Rs.10,000-15,200/- have been given a revised pay band of Rs.15,600-39,100/- plus AGP of Rs.7000/-. The distinction is made between the two pay scales; one which was given to those lecturers who were having less than three years of service in selection grade, which was as per pre-revised pay scale of Rs.12,000-18,300/- and which post was also given the pay band of Rs.15,600-39,100/- with slightly higher AGP of Rs.8,000/-. This was categorically indicated in Table III. Table IV was made applicable for those readers and lecturers selection grade who were having three years of service and those who were working in the pay scale of Rs.12,000-18,300/- they were given the pay band of Rs.37,400-67,000 plus AGP of Rs.9000/-. Now these posts are to be declared or treated as Associate Professors. The specific pay scale was given to the post of Professors which according to the UGC were earlier given the pay scale of Rs.16,400-22,400/-. The revised pay band given to this post was Rs.37,400-67,000/- plus AGP of Rs.10,000/-, as was indicated in Table V. If the different pay scale mentioned in the different Tables referred to herein above are taken into consideration, those Assistant Professors, Lecturers or Readers working in the selection grade pay scale, who were given the benefit of pay scale of Rs.12,000-18,300/-, they were given the revised pay band of Rs.15,600-39,100/- with AGP of Rs.8,000/-, which was not comparable with the pay scale of the post of Professor as the post of Professor was not only independently shown, but it was further said that the pre-revised pay scale of the same was slightly higher than the pay scale of the aforesaid Readers, Lecturers and Assistant Professors. The Scheme specifically prescribes different standard for designating a Professor, but it nowhere prescribes that the said person should be working only in the pre-revised scale as mentioned in Table V, otherwise the revised pay band plus AGP would not be applicable. This leaves this Court with no option, but to accept that the post of Professor was separately designated and irrespective of the pre-revised pay scale, a pay band similar to the pay band of the Assistant Professors selection grade (or Associate Professors) with slightly higher AGP was sanctioned by the UGC to the said post. This has to be noted that in some other post, the incumbents who were working in the lesser pre-revised pay scale were given this revised pay band plus AGP as is referable from Table VI of the Scheme.

13 : In view of this, if the entire Scheme is looked into, no rider was put by the UGC in its Scheme that a particular revised pay band with AGP would be applicable to a post only if the incumbent on the said post was getting the salary in the pre-revised pay scale indicated in the appropriate table appended to the Scheme. Different considerations were done by the UGC in the matter of prescribing the revised pay band, as it was categorically provided in paragraph 2 of the Scheme where the revised pay scales, Service conditions and Career Advancement Scheme was formulated by the UGC. It was categorically said that incumbents working as Assistant Professor, herein the case of State of Madhya Pradesh which post is treated to be equivalent to the post of Reader and Lecturers selection grade and those who have completed three years of service shall be placed in the pay band of Rs.37,400-67,000 with AGP of Rs.9,000/- and shall be redesignated as Associate Professor. This was for those who were not promoted to the post of Professor and were in fact working in the selection grade pay scale. The designation or redesignation of such a post as Associate Professor, would not change the status of the persons like petitioners as they have already been promoted as per the Scheme of the Gazetted Rules long back, before even coming into force of the Scheme formulated by the UGC. It will not be out of place to mention here again that though the Scheme was made applicable with effect from 1.1.2006 by the UGC, but it was formulated only on 31.12.2008 and subsequently converted into a Regulation in the year 2010. The right of designation as full fledged Professor accrued in favour of petitioners thus was not to be affected by such a Scheme which was applicable with effect from 1.1.2006 only. It was reiterated in the entire Scheme that the pay band for the post of Professor shall be Rs.37,400-67,000/- with AGP of Rs.10,000/-. There is no restriction put by the UGC that the said benefit would be available only to the direct recruits Professors and not to the promotees. According to the law, it was rightly done so because once the recruitment is done by two different sources, the recruitees become a part of one cadre and there cannot be a distinction in the matter of grant of pay only on the basis of the source of recruitment of such incumbents. Further, it has to be seen that the UGC has not insisted on pre-revised scale for grant of specific pay band and AGP for a simple reason that there may be different pay scale prescribed by the State Governments of different States of the country looking to their financial capability, and if the post though higher in nomenclature has been given a lesser pay scale to the teaching posts in higher education institutes by a particular State in comparison to the pay scale given by the other States, an anomaly would be created in such a manner if any restriction is put for grant of revised pay band with AGP on the basis of pre-revised pay scale. If this is allowed, it would be squarely hit by Article 14, 16 and 39(d) of the Constitution of India and would be a hostile discrimination of a group within the group. A class within the class cannot be created without there being a reasonable nexus to achieve an object justifiedly. This particular aspect is also taken care of by UGC as would be clear from the memo sent by UGC to the Principal Secretary of the department which would be referred to herein after.

17 : In view of the discussions made herein above at length and in view of all these facts, that the petitioners are to be treated as Professor and that the revised pay band is granted by the UGC under its Scheme solely on the basis of post and not on the basis of pre-revised pay scale, as is generally done by the Pay Commissions, the stand taken by the respondents is to be repudiated outrightly, the writ petitions are bound to be allowed.