Judgment

B.P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.:- This civil appeal is preferred against the judgment and order of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent Dr. Indra Pratap Singh.

2. The respondent was appointed as a lecturer by the appellant-University, on temporary basis, on 26-8-1974 in the department of Basic Principles in the Institute of Medical Sciences. His appointment was effective for a period of eleven months. At the end of eleven months, he was reappointed on the same basis for a further period of eleven months. By means of such appointments, he was continued up to 31-3-1980. There was no reappointment thereafter. On 21-7-1980, the respondent was appointed as a Reader in Sri Ayurved College of the Nagpur University. He worked there till 20-9-1982. On 22-9-1982, he was appointed as a lecturer in the appellant-University in the very same department, on a permanent basis. On this occasion, his salary was fixed giving him as many as fourteen increments so as to protect his last drawn pay at Nagpur.

3. Banaras Hindu University is a central University. It is entirely founded by the University Grants Commission (U.G.C.). The U.G.C. had evolved a scheme called Merit Promotion Scheme with a view to provide an incentive to teachers, to prevent stagnation and also to improve their efficiency. One of the conditions which a lecturer must satisfy before he becomes entitled to promotion is eight years continuous service. Cl. (a) of para 2 of the Scheme which provides for the said qualification reads thus:

"2(a). Teacher in the University departments engaged in advance teaching and research and whose contribution and achievements are such as to merit recognition must be considered for merit promotion in the first instance after completing eight years of continuous service in their respective cadre, of which at least four years should be in the institution where he/she is being considered for such assessment and merit promotion."

4. On being selected under the Merit Promotion Scheme a lecturer is designated as Reader and becomes entitled to a higher pay scale. The selection under this scheme has to be made by the University concerned no doubt in accordance with the criteria evolved by the U. G. C.

5. The respondent applied for being selected under the said scheme in the year 1983. The University, however, was of the opinion that he is not eligible for being considered inasmuch as he does not satisfy the requirement of eight years continuous service in the cadre. The objection was that there was break in his service between 1-4-1980 and 20-7-1980 (both days inclusive) which means that his continuous service can be counted only from 21-7-1980. If so calculated, he does not satisfy the said requirement by the year 1983. Another objection raised by the University was that the service rendered by the respondent in the Nagpur University cannot be counted. The respondents case, however, as not only that his service at Nagpur is liable to be counted but that the University was competent to and ought to condone such breaks in service and that indeed it has condoned such breaks in service in the case of other teachers. Refusal to do so in the case of respondent, it was submitted, was discriminatory and arbitrary.

6. In view of the stand taken by the University, the respondent approached the Allahabad High Court by way of Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. 3396 of 1985: (reported in 1988 Lab IC 1191). At his instance the High Court made an interim order directing the University to place the petitioners case before the Selection Committee (constituted for the purpose of selection under the said scheme). According to the counsel for the University, the respondents case has accordingly been considered and the decision of the Selection Committee kept in a sealed cover. The matter has not yet been placed before the Executive Council of the University which is the final authority in the matter of selection under t