Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

26. The first statute of the university does not make it mandatory for the Board of Management to obtain prior recommendation of Academic Council for upgradation or redesignation of the post or grant of higher pay-scale. Being a highest administrative and supervisory body, the Administrative Committee has got ample power to take a decision on its own in case a matter is placed before it in accordance with rules. Redesignation of post or grant of higher pay-scale may be very well placed in the agenda of Board of Management for its decision. Prior concurrence or recommendation from the Academic Council is not necessary. It is evident from Chapters XII and XIII of the first Statute.

2.The teachers of the University shall be employed on a whole-time basis on the scales of pay approved for the University provided that the proportion of time of the teachers to be devoted to teaching, research and extension or administrative duties should be specified in their contract of employment."

28. A plain reading of Chapter XII reveals that the Board of Management shall take a decision on the recommendation of the Academic Council in this behalf with regard to classification of teachers. It does not put an embargo to the powers of the Board of Management to proceed on its own to meet out the requirement of university. In the present case, keeping in view the circular dated 11.9.1984 (supra) and the Vice Chancellor's report, the matter was placed before the Board of Management in its 80th meeting for redesignation of the post of Games Assistant and grant of teacher's scale. The matter was placed before the Board of Management to extend parity keeping in view the fact that the State Government itself granted the pay-scale of teachers to the persons holding identical post in different universities. Hence, there appears to be no room of doubt that the Board of Management in view of the report of the then Vice Chancellor was empowered to take a decision for grant of teachers' pay-scale, upgradation of post as well as redesignation of post of the Games Assistant and for that, recommendation of Academic Council does not seem to be necessary. This fact is also evident from Chapter XIII of the First Statute of the university. Under Clauses 10 and 11 of Chapter XIII where the Board is the appointing authority or the appointment is to be made subject to approval of Board, the Vice Chancellor has been conferred power to make appointment for the period of six months. With regard to all non-teaching staff under Clause 11 with regard to all other staff not specifically provided in the Act, the appointment shall be made by Kulpati with the approval of the Board. For convenience, Clause 11 of Chapter XIII is reproduced as under :

(b) The posts for which the Kulpati is the appointing authority under the provision of the Act."

29. In view of above, there appears to be no reason to hold that the Vice Chancellor was not empowered to place the matter before the Board with regard to redesignation of post and grant of teacher's scale to the petitioner (supra) and recommendation under the circumstances from the Academic Council does not seem to be mandatory. In view of above, the finding recorded by the State Government does not seem to be correct. The Board of Management and the Vice Chancellor acted within their jurisdiction while redesignating the post in question as well as granting teacher's scale to the petitioner in the manner discussed hereinaboveto extend the parity in pay-scale and status like other universities.

The petitioner's duty while holding the post of Games Assistant is identical to the duty of Physical Director considered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.S. Ramamohana Rao (supra). The Vice Chancellor has also forwarded to the State Government reiterating that the petitioner squarely falls within the definition of teacher provided under Section 2(k) of the Act. Hence, the Board has rightly upgraded his post redesignated the same to award the salary of teacher.

47. After considering the relevant provisions and duties of the petitioner in P.S. Ramamohana Rao (supra), their Lordships of Hon'ble Supreme Court had considered the definition of teacher provided in respective statute and made observation as under :