IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
Mangesh S. Patil, Shailesh P. Brahme, JJ.
Amol S/o Ashokrao Zalte - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra through its Secretary, Higher and Technical Education Department and ors. - Respondents
Writ Petition No. 1676 of 2017
Decided On : 19-09-2024
Qualification - Lecturer Appointment - UGC Act Section 26 - The court interpreted UGC regulations regarding qualifications for lecturers, emphasizing that qualifications must be met at the time of appointment, influencing the decision to deny permanent approval to the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a lecturer, sought temporary and permanent approval for his appointment and salary disbursement, claiming he met qualifications after acquiring an M. Phil. degree post-appointment.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner did not possess the requisite qualifications at the time of his appointment and that his subsequent M. Phil. acquisition did not retroactively qualify him for permanent approval.
Issues: Whether the petitioner had the requisite qualifications at the time of his appointment and if the M. Phil. degree acquired later could be considered for permanent approval.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that qualifications must be assessed based on the regulations in force at the time of appointment, and subsequent qualifications do not alter the initial eligibility.
Result: The writ petition is dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
Shailesh P. Brahme, J.
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard both the sides finally with their consent at the admission stage.
2. The petitioner who is working as a lecturer in the respondent No. 4 - college is seeking direction for granting him temporary approval for the period preceding to acquisition of M. Phil. degree and permanent approval from acquisition of M. Phil. He is also seeking disbursement of salary as per the Government Resolution dated 04 April, 2012.
3. The respondent No. 4 – Science college is affiliated to the respondent No. 3 - university and is run by the respondent No. 6- educational institution. The petitioner and respondent No. 5 are the employees of respondent No. 6. By letter dated 08.07.2003 issued by the respondent No. 3 - university addressed to respondent No. 4 – college, permission was granted to fill in various posts comprising of thirteen posts of lecturers in the subject of Computer Science on non grant basis. Later on vide Government Resolution dated 04.04.2012, four posts of Computer Science were brought on grant in aid basis.
4. We are called upon to determine as to whether the petitioner was having requisite qualification when he was appointed as a lecturer in Computer Science on 08.10.2003 and the qualification of M. Phil. acquired by him subsequently on 22.05.2009 can be treated as requisite qualification at the relevant time. To delve on the controversy, it is expedient to disclose the qualifications prescribed by the UGC and the changes brought up from time to time.
5. The University Grants Commission (for short 'UGC') would prescribes the qualification for appointment of teachers in various streams of education as per Section 26 of the University Grants Commission Act. By notification published in the month of March 2000, the minimum qualification for the post of lecturer in the Humanities, Social Science, Science, Commerce, Physical Education, Foreign Languages and Law was as follows :
6. Thereafter, Regulation of 2000 was amended on 31 July 2002 and came to be recognized as First Amendment Regulation 2002 substituting the qualification for the post of lecturer as :
7. Thereafter, second amendment was introduced with effect from 14.06.2006 substituting earlier qualification as follows :
8. The third amendment was introduced in the Regulation on 11.07.2009 substituting earlier qualification in following terms :
Provided, however, that candidates, who are or have been awarded Ph. D. degree in compliance of the “University Grants Commission (minimum standards and procedure for award of Ph. D. degree), Regulation 2009, shall be exempted from the requirement of the minimum eligibility condition of NET/SET for recruitment and appointment of As
Sudhir Narayan Sawant Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others 2006(5) MhLJ 96.
Vidyavardhaka Sangh and another Vs. Y. D. Deshpande and others (2006) 12 SCC 482.
Qualifications for lecturer appointments must be met at the time of appointment, and later-acquired qualifications do not retroactively qualify an individual.
Judgment affirms the necessity of due process in employment, emphasizing that failure to provide a hearing before termination violates natural justice. UGC regulations' retrospective application prot....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the retrospective application of the 2016 UGCR to protect Dr. Jayakumar's appointment as Lecturer in Sociology by the University.
The denial of UGC scale of pay from the date of regularization based on unjust conditions is discriminatory, violating equal treatment under Article 14.
The Selection Committee cannot alter the essential qualifications for a position once the selection process has commenced, and the Chancellor has the authority to terminate appointments that do not c....
Qualifications - UGC has prescribed minimum eligibility qualification for appointment of Assistant Professor (PG) in English and notification/advertisement was issued prescribing minimum eligibility ....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.