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

2023 Supreme(AP) 1490

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATHI
K. MANMADHA RAO, J.
Dr. Kanala Kodanda Reddy, S/o. K. Ramachandra Reddy - Petitioner
Versus
The Sri Venkateswara University, rep. by its Registrar and Another - Respondents
WRIT PETITION Nos.14107 and 15333 of 2022
Decided On : 29-09-2023

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Sri P.V. Ramana
For the Respondents: Sri K.V. Raghuveer, G.P. Sri Butta Vijaya Bhaskar, S.C.

Past service in temporary roles can be counted for promotion under Career Advancement Scheme, aligning with UGC regulations; denial of such benefits violates legal rights.

Headnote:(A) UGC Regulations 2010 - Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) - Past service counting - The petitioner, appointed as Assistant Professor in 2006, sought recognition of prior service for promotion under CAS but was denied by the University. The court found that the prior service cannot be disregarded, concluding that promotional benefits are to be granted reflecting past service and UGC norms. (Paras 4, 11, 24, 27)

(B) Legal standing - The University argued that benefits granted in violation of regulations cannot be continued. The court emphasized that claims for benefits under CAS must comply with prescribed UGC regulations, asserting: "An illegality cannot be perpetuated". (Paras 15, 16, 24)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner had been wrongly denied appropriate AGP recognition based on misinterpretation of past service regulations and university decisions after an initial appointment and service period.

Findings of Court:
The court determined the actions of the University in cancelling the AGP benefits were illegal and reinstated the petitioner's AGP.

Issues: The central issues were whether the past service could be considered under CAS and the legality of the University's cancellations.

Ratio Decidendi: The court maintained that legitimate prior service must be acknowledged per UGC regulations, reinforcing that administrative decisions must align with legislative frameworks.

Result: Writ Petitions allowed.

Table of Content
1. court addressed common issues in related writ petitions. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. eligibility for counting past service under ugc regulations. (Para 4 , 6 , 18)
3. court evaluated arguments on service validity for promotions. (Para 12 , 14 , 24)
4. conclusion on entitlement for agp based on previous service. (Para 20 , 21 , 27)

ORDER :

(K. MANMADHA RAO, J.)

As the issue involved in these Writ Petitions is one and the same, they are being taken up for hearing as well as disposed of by way of this Common Order.

2. Heard Sri P.V. Ramana, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners; Sri K.V. Raghuveer, learned Government Pleader for Higher Education and Sri Butta Vijaya Bhaskar, learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents.

3. Since the facts in both the writ petitions are similar and identical, therefore WP No.14107 of 2022 is taken as lead case, and the facts therein hereinafter will be referred to for convenience.

4. In pursuance to the advertisement issued by the respondent University on 10.01.2006 the petitioner was selected for the post of Assistant Professor in Academic Staff college, Tirupati in the scale of Rs.8000-275-13500 besides other allowances. Subsequently he was transferred to the Department of Anthropology, S.V. University College, vide proceedings of V.C., dated 10.09.2007. Prior to his entry into the University service as Assistant Professor, the petitioner rendered his duties as Young Scientist, Pool Scientist and Research Associate, funded by DSI, New Delhi, CSIR, New Delhi and ICMR, New Delhi. The petitioner‘s appointment was made after conducting interview on all India basis as per the UGC norms and he continued for 13 years in the department of Anthropology in the respondent University. While the matter stood thus, the Government issued G.O.Ms.No.208 H.E Department, dated 29.10.2009 providing revision pay scales as per UGC pay sclaes 1996 in respect of Teachers of University and colleges. Thereafter, the Government issued another G.O.Ms.No.38 revising appendix to G.O.Ms.No.14 dated 20.02.2010 under which point No.1.13 provides “Counting of past service” for direct recruitment and promotion under CAS. Since the petitioner has completed 13 years past valid service, it is to be counted for the purpose of CAS for the purpose of fixation of AGPs of Rs.7000, Rs.8000 and Rs.9000 for promotion under CAS. Even though the petitioner is entitled for the said criteria provided thereunder, the respondent university did not consider his case. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

5. The counter affidavits are filed in both the matters, for convenience, the averments in counter in W.P.No.14107 of 2022 are stated as under:

6. The 1st respondent filed counter and denied all the allegations made in the petition. It is stated the proceedings No.E.II(2) KKR/Anthro/CAS/2007-18 dated 10.01.2019 were cancelled due to erroneous pay fixation, in which the past service were considered in cumulative manner which is against the UGC regulations for the promotion under CAS, vide proceedings No.E.II(2)/KKR/Anthro/CAS/2007-18 dated 28.1.2019. Further the same was clarified by the A.P. State Council of Higher Education in its letter no.APSCGE-Ums-C1-1001/SVU-CSS-Kodanda Reddy/2020, dated 14.5.2020. Acceded to the above, the petitioner was continued and applied for further promotion under CAS. Further, the Executive Council Resolution No.Confi-1, dated 18.3.2021 resolved to award of respective AGPs be approved by considering the regulations of the UGC regarding designations and clarification of the APSCHE on clubbing of past service of the teachers, subject to final outcome of the writ petitions pending before the High Court of Judicature. Accordingly to which the promotion under CAS is stepwise and should in linear manner, the past service should not be considered in cumulative manner. The same was challenged by the petitioner by way of filing WP No.14616 of 2012 before the High Court and this Court while d

          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