SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1992 Supreme(SC) 645

A.M. AHMADI, M.M. PUNCHHI AND K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.
Writ Petns. Nos. 16309-16376 of 1984 with 563 of 1989, D/-16-9-1992.
Gopal Krishna Sharma and others, Petitioners
Versus
State of Rajasthan and others, Respondents.
WITH
Yamuna Shankar Sharma, Petitioner
Versus
State of Rajasthan and another, Respondents.

Headnote:

Constitution Of India,1950 – Article,32 - Educational qualification for appointment - Research Assistants who claim - University Rajasthan has implemented UGC recommendations and granted UGC scales in case of other members of teaching staff- It may be noticed that UGC in its report recommended upward revision of pay scales of University and College teachers which recommendation came to be approved by Government of India- According to said recommendation three pays scales were approved for University and College teachers these being Lecturers and Assistant for Readers and for Professors replacing then prevailing pay scales and respectively with effect Research Assistants who claim to belong to teaching faculty claimed lowest pay scale which University had refused grant notwithstanding a host of representations- They further contended that benefit of revised UGC scale was also extended Junior Lecturers who were then in scale Indian Council of Agriculture Research (ICAR) had also clarified in its communication that it makes no distinction between academic research and extension work Agricultural Universities and had extended benefit revised UGC scales Extension/ Research Assistants also they possessed qualifications of Lecturer and were teachers under University Statutes –Held, University should be directed to pay difference with interest- However court would leave it to authorities to work out a scheme with sufficient incentives depositing arrears in Provident Fund like and giving an option to employees to avail of that benefit if they so desire- That should however be done not later than three months- Court also direct authorities to calculate difference payable to employees within four months from today and pay same to employees a scheme if any as per employees option or if no scheme is prepared in cash amount paid by way of difference in salary will be spread over wise for income-tax purposes court must mention that counsel for petitioners had urged that even though petitioners have put in long years as Research Associates they are still treated ad employees with no security of tenure- Court would leave it to authorities to consider feasibility of preparing a scheme where such Research Associates can be absorbed in regular cadre of Research Assistants as and when vacancies arise- Since educational requirements process of selection and job charts are almost identical such a scheme can be of mutual benefit to employees as well as University employees getting security of tenure and University getting experienced hands- Court would expect University to examine feasibility of preparing such a scheme at an early date Order accordingly

Judgement

AHMADI, J.:- This batch of Writ Petitions brought under Art. 32 of the Constitution arises on account of the respondent Universitys refusal to grant Research Assistants/ Associates the scale of Rs. 700-1600 recommended by the University Grants Commission (UGC) with effect from 1st January, 1973, even though the University, namely, the Sukhadia University, Rajasthan, (earlier known as University of Udaipur) has implemented the UGC recommendations and granted the UGC scales in the case of other members of the teaching staff. It may be noticed that the UGC in its report (1975-76) recommended upward revision of pay scales of University and College teachers, which recommendation came to be approved by the Government of India. According to the said recommendation three pays scales were approved for University and College teachers, these being Rs. 700-1600 for Lecturers and Assistant Professors, Rs. 1200-1900 for Readers and Rs. 1500-2500 for Professors replacing the then prevailing pay scales of Rs. 400-950, Rs.700-1250 and Rs. 1100-1600, respectively, with effect from 1-1-73. Research Assistants who claim to belong to the teaching faculty claimed the lowest pay scale of Rs. 700-1600 which the University had refused to grant notwithstanding a host of representations. They further contended that the benefit of the revised UGC scale of Rs. 700-1600 was also extended to Junior Lecturers who were then in the scale of Rs. 300-600. The Indian Council of Agriculture Research (ICAR) had also clarified in its communication dated June 26/July 1, 1977, that it makes no distinction between academic, research and extension work in Agricultural Universities and had extended the benefit of the revised UGC scales to Extension/ Research Assistants also if they possessed the qualifications of Lecturer and were recognised as teachers under the University Statutes. The Vice-Chancellor of the respondent University had also written a letter dated 14-15th December , 1976 to the Education Commissioner of the State Government to extend the benefit of the revised UGC scales to Junior Lecturers/ Research Assistants/ Extension Assistants as they belonged to the teachers category. While the claim was approved in the case of Junior Lecturers, it came to be spurned in the case of Research Assistants even though Research Assistants of Agricultural Universities in the States of Haryana (Hissar), Punjab (Ludhiana) and Himachal Pradesh were placed in the scale of Rs. 700-1600. The petitioners also relied on a letter dated 17-12-77 of the Under-secretary (Education), ICAR addressed to the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Rajasthan, Agriculture (Gr. II) Department, Jaipur, wherein it is stated that Research and Extension staff declared Teachers under the University Statute would be eligible for the UGC revised pay scale. The petitioners further point out that the post of Research Assistant in the University was equivalent to that of Junior Lecturer, being in the same scale of Rs. 300-600 and when by Notification dated 2-7-74, Statute 47(1) came to be amended and the expression Junior Lecturer in clause (v) thereof came to be substituted by the expression Lecturer, persons holding equivalent posts in the same pay scale were given the same nomenclature by the Registrars subsequent notification dated 7-9-77. This was so because, contend the petitioners, they fell within the definition of Teacher in section 2(j) of the Udaipur University Act, 1962 which runs as under :

"(j) Teacher means a person appointed or recognised by the University for the purpose of instruction or conducting and guiding research or extension programmes and includes a person who may be declared by the statute to be a teacher."

The petitioners, therefore, contend that a person who is appointed by the University for conducting and guiding research falls within the scope and ambit of the above definition and hence there is no room for any doubt that a Research Assistant employed for conducti
















Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top