Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. The post held by the Lecturer or Reader who is promoted to the post of Reader or University Professor shall be deemed to be upgraded with effect from the date of such' promotion and shall remain upgraded as such till the incumbent continues to hold the post, but the same shall be converted into the post of Lecturer, or Reader, as they case may be in the event of retirement, resignation, death or otherwise, provided that if the post of Reader or Lecturer was itself an upgraded post which was further upgraded as that of Reader or University Professor, the same shall be converted into the Lecturer's post in the event of vacancy.

7. The upgraded post shall be deemed to be a substantive post till the promote holds it/but any temporary vacancy on the post on account of the promote being on leave of on foreign service or officiating in or hold another post on temporary basis; shall be that of lecturer or Reader (not being as upgraded post), as the case may be.

8. The Lecturer who is promoted as Reader or the Reader who is promoted as University Professor shall from the date of promotion draw his pay in the higher scale which shall be fixed under the relevant provision of the service statute of the University.

13. I have heard Dr. Sadanand Jha, learned Counsel for the petitioners, Mr. K.P. Yadav, learned Standing Counsel No. 5, Mr. Shyama Prasad Mukherjee, learned Counsel for respondent No. 11 and Mr. Ganesh Prasad Singh, learned Counsel for respondents No. 6 and 10.

14. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that after 30.9.1975, appointments to all the teaching posts in Engineering Colleges, Institutes could only be made by direct recruitment on the basis of All-India competition as per the norms and guide lines prescribed by the A.I.C.T.E, That part after enactment of All India Council of Technical Education Act, 1987, the statutory powers to ensure proper planning and co-ordinate development of the technical education system throughout the country, the promotion of qualitative improvements of such education in relation to planned quantitative growth and the regulation and proper maintenance of norms and standards in the technical education system or for matters connected therewith, have been vested in the A.I.C.T.E. As such all appointments of teaching staff to the posts of Assistant Professor, Associate Professors and Professor in the Engineering Colleges, Institutes are to be made only as per the norms and guidelines prescribed by the A.I.C.T.E., otherwise not. The Statute for time-bound promotion cannot override the provision of A.I.C.T.E. Act, 1987. Any provision or rule framed by the Chancellor or the University, inconsistent with the norms and guidelines for filling up the posts of Assistant Professors, Associate Professors and Professors in the Engineering Colleges, Institutes, are repugnant to the A.I.C.T.E. Act, 1987, could will be illegal and void. When under the norms and guidelines prescribed by the A.LC.T.E., the posts in cadre of Assistant Professors, Associate Professors and Professors in the Technical Colleges/Institutes can only be filled up by direct recruitment on the basis of All-India competition, filling up such posts by promotion under the time-bound promotion scheme being inconsistent with the provision of the A.I.C.T.E. Act, 1987 would be illegal and cannot be sustained. In support of his contention, learned Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Tamil Nadu v. Adhiyaman Education & Research Institute reported in 1995 Vol. 4 SCC page 104. Learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that no Associate Professor can be appointed to the cadre of Professor of Engineering Colleges/Institutes, save and except under the norms and guidelines prescribed by the A.I.C.T.E., namely, by recruitment made strictly on merit on the basis of All-India advertisement and selection. The time-bound promotion is made as per the recommendation of the Fourth Pay Revision Committee, which has been adopted by the University and that a person having been promoted under the Time-bound Promotion Scheme de hors the mode of appointment prescribed by the A.I.C.T.E., cannot be treated to be holding a post in cadre of Professor, The learned Counsel for the petitioners submitted that benefit under the time-bound promotion scheme has been extended by upgrading the post held by the Assistant Professor or the Associate Professor up to the period the promote holds the post. The upgraded post vanishes as soon as the promote ceases to hold the post because of retirement, death, resignation etc. or otherwise, whereas, the directly recruited Associated Professors or Professors have been appointed in cadre posts on the basis of selection made strictly on merit on the basis of All-India advertisement. The time-bound promotion is not made against any cadre post and such promotion is personal to the promoter promotion and as such time-bound promotes form distinct class different from the direct recruits. The time-bound promotes hold ex-cadre posts and they cannot be treated equally with the direct recruits appointed under the norms prescribed by the A.I.C.T.F. in the cadre of' Professors for the purpose of seniority and promotion. Learned Counsel for the petitioners further submitted, that number of time-bound promotes, who are included in the impugned provisional seniority list, although appeared, were not selected by the Bihar Public Service Commission as direct recruits in the cadre of Professor under the norms and criteria prescribed by the A.I.C.T.E. and that number of them also do not possess requisite qualification for the post of Professor. It has also been submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that the time bound promotes do not hold the posts in the cadre of Professors had all along been the stand of the Government and rightly the Government took the said stand in their counter-affidavit filed in C.W.J.C. No. 8692 of 1992. However, the Government has now made a volta-face and taken a quito different stand that the direct recruits and the time-bound promotes are to be treated equally for the purpose of inter se seniority, which is ex facie arbitrary and illegal.

21. From the recommendation of the 4th Pay Revision Committee, it becomes apparent that the Scheme for time-bound promotion was meant as an anti-stagnation measure. Under the Statute for granting benefit of time bound promotion, the posts held by the Assistant Professor or Associate Professor should be deemed to be upgraded and would remain upgraded so long the promote would continue to hold the upgraded posts. The upgraded post should be deemed to be a substantive post till promote would hold it. The upgrade post would convert to the original post of Assistant Professor or Associate Professor, as the case may be as soon as the promote to the upgraded post would cease to hold the upgraded post. It is, therefore, apparent that benefit of time-bound promotion given to the incumbents are purely personal and the upgraded posts to which they are promoted survive so long they hold the posts. That being so, it cannot be said that there was even temporary addition to the cadre strength of Professors because of giving time bound promotion to a number of Associate Professors of three Engineering Colleges by upgrading the post held by them to the post of Professor.