Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Rajiv Shakdher, Talwant Singh, JJ.
Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Ms. Sangeeta Jain – Respondent
Review Petition 535 of 2019 in W.P(C) 11316 of 2017
Decided On : 02-03-2023
Master's Degree Requirement - Administrative Tribunal Decision - AICTE Notification dated 30/12/1999, 05/03/2010, 18/10/2012, 08/11/2012, 01/03/2019 - The court dismissed the review petition challenging the requirement of a Master's Degree for grant of Selection Grade to a Lecturer. The court found that no University in India offered a Master's Degree in Beauty Culture, making it impossible for the respondent to fulfill the requirement. The court also emphasized the applicability of AICTE notifications and office orders in determining the eligibility criteria for the Selection Grade.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought review of a decision dismissing the writ petition against an order by the Central Administrative Tribunal, claiming the requirement of a Master's Degree for grant of Selection Grade to a Lecturer was overlooked by the court. The respondent argued that no University in India offered a Master's Degree in Beauty Culture, making it impossible for the respondent to fulfill the requirement.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the AICTE notifications and office orders were applicable in determining the eligibility criteria for the Selection Grade. It concluded that the notification dated 30/12/1999 was irrelevant, and the review petition was dismissed for failing to point out any illegality or mistake in the previous judgment.
Issues: The main issue was whether the requirement of a Master's Degree for grant of Selection Grade to a Lecturer was overlooked by the court. The court also considered the applicability of AICTE notifications and office orders in determining the eligibility criteria for the Selection Grade.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the requirement of a Master's Degree should be practically achievable, and since no University in India offered a Master's Degree in Beauty Culture, the respondent could not be put to perform an impossible task. The court also highlighted the relevance of AICTE notifications and office orders in determining the eligibility criteria for the Selection Grade.
Final Decision: The review petition was dismissed as the court found no mistake or error apparent on the face of the record of the judgment dated 05.11.2019.
JUDGMENT
Talwant Singh, J.
Review Petition 535/2019 in W.P(C) 11316/2017
1. The present review petition has been filed by the original petitioner seeking review of order dated 05.11.2019 in W.P.(C) No. 11316/2017, whereby the writ petition filed by the petitioner against an order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred as `CAT') dated 15.12.2016 was dismissed with the following observations:
"8. That it is clear from AICTE Clarification that on 5th March 2010, ME/M. Tech/Master's Degree was essential requirement for grant of Selection grade. AICTE has not withdrawn the existing requirement of Master's degree for the grant of Selection grade, which has been further affixed by 7th CPC AICTE Notification DATED 01-3-2019 also, clearly mentioning that Master's Degree is the minimum qualification for grant of Selection grade.
Therefore, contention of the Respondent that Master's Degree is not required is wrong, instead even first class is also required either at UG or PG level.
9. That this Hon'ble High court has passed the order by granting the Lecturer (Selection Grade) to the Respondent without Master's Degree and without her having Ist class degree at Graduation level. This issue was already upheld by the Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in WP(C) Nos. 578/2013, titled Sri Bhabesh Goswami & Ors. Vs. State of Assam & Ors. Copy of Judgment in WP(C) Nos. 578/2013 are annexed as Annexure R7.
10. That this Hon'ble High court inadvertently overlooked the requirement of Master's Degree while passing the order, whereas at the time of Respondent Joining as Lecturer at DTTE, Master's Degree is one of the requirement for promotion to Lecturer (Selection grade) along with other conditions if he/she meets as also further established by Hon'ble Gauhati High Court in WP(C) Nos. 578/2013 titled Sri Bhabesh Goswami & Ors. Vs. State of Assam & Ors.
As available on web portal, the following Institutes offering 02 years Master's degree program in Cosmetology/Health.
(i) Sandip University, Nashik.
(ii) ISAS International beauty school, Pune/Ahemdabad.
(iii) PG degree available in Naturopathy.
(iv) PG degree available in Yoga.
11. That this Hon'ble High court inadvertently overlooked the conditions stipulated in office order dated 29-7-2010 wherein it is clearly stipulated in Para 12.1 (ix) and (xii) issued under conditions "Subject to other requirement by AICTE/State Govt. to move up to AGP of Rs. 8000/9000".
Therefore;
(i) the requirement of first class either at Bachelor's or Master's level is one of the requirement of AICTE/State Govt. in accordance with provision laid by AICTE Notification dated 30/12/1999, Clarification dated 05-3- 2010, 18-10-2012, AICTE MOM dated 28.08.2014 submitted in CP No. 605/2012,606/2012 & 613/2012 (in consultation of AICTE) and AICTE Notification dated 01-3-2019 read together along with other conditions laid down by the AICTE vide AICTE Notification dated 08-11- 2012 w.e.f. 05- 3-2010 (issued in continuation of 05-3- 2010 read with 2016) as mentioned below.
(ii) 03 publications within 12 years of service since joining as Lecturer for grant of AGP of Rs. 9000 (stage- 4).
(iii) Requirement of refresher courses as stipulated by AICTE. Copy of AICTE Notification dated 08.11.2012 is annexed as ANNEXURE-R8.
Copy of AICTE clarification (MOM) dated 28.08.2014 is annexed as Annexure R-9."
2. This revision petition was dismissed vide order dated 23.12.2019; however, the present petitioner approached the Hon'ble Supreme Court by filing a batch of appeals ( As there are two other petitions, which were disposed of by common order dated 05.11.2019) being Civil Appeal Numbers 328/2021 to 333/2021 and the Hon'ble Supreme Court was pleased to pass the following order.
"Delay condoned.
Leave granted.
Learned Additional Solicitor General has obtained instructions and submits that the documents she sought to rely upon in hearing on 27th January, 2021 were on record before the High Court, a position not the learned counsel for
The practical achievability of the requirement of a Master's Degree and the relevance of AICTE notifications and office orders in determining eligibility criteria for the Selection Grade.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and applicability of AICTE notifications and office orders in determining the eligibility criteria for the grant of Selection gr....
The central legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and applicability of AICTE notifications in determining the eligibility for grant of Selection Grade.
Lecturers appointed before January 1, 1996 are entitled to selection grade benefits without needing a Master’s degree, ensuring equal treatment in service matters.
The AICTE's clarifications dictate promotion qualifications; retrospective qualifications cannot be enforced by the State, ensuring rights of consistently employed individuals are protected.
Point of law: A criterion which has the effect of denying a candidate his right to be considered for the post on the principle that he is having higher qualification than prescribed cannot be rationa....
There is no equivalent Rule akin to Rule 10(a)(ii). A perusal of the said Rule 10(a)(ii) clearly presupposes and provides that the acquisition of a higher qualification would presuppose the acquisiti....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
