The court affirmed that teachers appointed after the Ph.D. requirement cannot claim higher pay or designation if they fail to acquire the qualification within the stipulated time, emphasizing adherence to AICTE regulations.

JUDGMENT

SUDHANSHU DHULIA, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. By means of the Civil Appeals arising out of SLP (C) Nos.7058-7061 of 2019, the appellant-Society seeks to challenge the order of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court dated 17.07.2017 as well as the order dated 22.12.2018, passed in review later. The impugned orders of the High Court direct the appellant-Society to extend the benefit of revised pay scales under the 6th Central Pay Commission to the Respondent-teachers, who were the original Writ Petitioners before the Bombay High Court. The Respondent-teachers are the ones who are presently teaching in engineering and technical institutes run and managed by the Appellant-Society, which is a private body and is not under the grant in aid of the Government.

3. Brief facts of the case are that the Respondent-teachers, who possess a Master’s degree in their field, were appointed as Lecturers/Assistant Professors by the appellant-Society in the institutes between 1995 and 2009. Requisite approval for their appointment was taken from the concerned Universities to which the said institutes were affiliated. It is also an admitted fact that the Respondent-teachers, with the exception of one teacher, were not able to acquire Ph.D.’s within seven years of their appointment in service, as was required.

4. At this stage, we may need to refer to the prescribed qualification of teachers in an Engineering Institute, which is laid down by the All India Council for Technical Education (hereinafter referred to as ‘AICTE’). AICTE is a body which was initially constituted in the year 1945 as an advisory body to the Government of India but was given a statutory status under the All India Council for Technical Education Act of 1987 (for short ‘1987 Act’) and we now can trace its formation as a Statutory Body under Section 3 of the 1987 Act. Its powers and functions are given under Section 10 of the 1987 Act, which read as under:

“10. Functions of the Council.— (1) It shall be the duty of the Council to take all such steps as it may think fit for ensuring coordinated and integrated development of technical education and maintenance of standards and for the purposes of performing its functions under this Act, the Council may—

x x x

(i) lay down norms and standards for courses, curricula, physical and instructional facilities, staff pattern, staff qualifications, quality instructions, assessment and examinations;”

5. Thus, under the powers referred above, AICTE is mandated to provide qualifications for teachers that would include Lecturers, Assistant Professors, Associate Professors and Professors, of Engineering and Technical Colleges.

6. It is an admitted position by both the sides here that the crucial date when Ph.D. was prescribed for the first time as a qualification for Lecturers/Assistant Professors is 15.03.2000. Prior to 15.03.2000, Ph.D. was not an essential and mandatory qualification for Lecturers/Assistant Professors. Out of the nine private respondents before us, who were also petitioners before the High Court, four were appointed prior to 15.03.2000 and the remaining five were appointed post 15.03.2000, when the notification dated 15.03.2000 had come into effect.

7. The subject matter of the notification dated 15.03.2000 reads as under:

“AICTE NOTIFICATION ON REVISION OF PAY-SCALES AND ASSOCIATED TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE OF TEACHERS, LIBRARIANS AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION PERSONNEL FOR DEGREE LEVEL TECHNICAL INSTITUTIONS.”

The above notification of AICTE prescribed minimum qualification for various teaching posts in degree level technical institutes and further prescribed qualifications for Assistant Professor as follows: