JUDGMENT

Jyoti Singh, J. (Oral)--Petitioner herein challenges an order dated 19.04.2018 whereby his claim for upgradation of Pay Scale at par with Senior Technical Assistant (`STA') has been rejected. A direction is also sought to the Respondents to give effect and benefit of the Resolution of Executive Council (`EC') dated 27.09.1995.

2. Facts to the extent relevant are that Petitioner was appointed as Statistical Assistant (`SA') on 24.07.1985 in Jawaharlal Nehru University/Respondent No.3 (`JNU') in the Pay Scale of Rs.1400-2300. Post of SA was an isolated post without any promotional avenues and as per the Petitioner, continues to be so. Prior to 5th CPC, revision of Pay Scales of SA was under consideration, as most of the Central Government Departments and Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, etc. had placed their SAs in the Pay Scale of Rs.1640-2900. Pay Scale of the Petitioner was revised to Rs.1640-2900 w.e.f. 01.04.1992 vide Notification dated 20.10.1995.

3. Initially, JNU had resolved to merge the cadre of SA with the cadre of Junior Engineer (`JE') by EC Resolution dated 18.08.1992, which was objected to by the Petitioner, as the charter of duties, nature of work and qualifications at the entry level were different. Petitioner represented that he may be merged/equated with STA or Senior Assistant instead.

4. Representations of the Petitioner were placed before Cadre Review Committee (`CRC') comprising of various subject experts and under the Chairmanship of Prof. R.P. Kaushik, who was also a Member of UGC/Respondent No.2 and the CRC recommended that Petitioner be given parity with STA, keeping in view that qualification of SA is higher than Technical Assistant and STA at entry level and they have special qualifications to handle their jobs. Decision of CRC was approved by EC vide Resolution No. 7.15 dated 27.09.1995.

5. Since the Pay Scale of the Petitioner was under revision, core Pay Scale of the Petitioner was revised vide Notification dated 20.10.1995 to Pay Scale of Rs.1640-2900 w.e.f. 01.04.1992. This was communicated to the Petitioner vide letter dated 13.12.1995. Petitioner was also held entitled to One Upward Movement (`OUM') on completion of 8 years of service in the Pay Scale of Rs.2000-3500 and accordingly, Petitioner's post was equated with STA.

6. By Resolution No. 5.1 dated 12.07.1996, JNU revised the Pay Scale of STA from Rs.2000-3500 to Rs.2200-4000 as first OUM. The Petitioner was, however, not placed in the said higher scale as first OUM and his parity with the post of STA was disturbed. Petitioner represented several times for removal of the disparity, however, despite the decision of Redressal Grievance Committee (`RGC') recommending in favour of the Petitioner in 2010, the benefit of the higher Pay Scale was not given to the Petitioner. When the representations did not receive any positive response, Petitioner filed W.P.(C) 1016/2018 in this Court, which was disposed of on 05.02.2018 recording the grievance of the Petitioner that he was being denied parity with STA and that the representations made by him were decided by a cryptic and non-speaking order and directing the Respondents to re-decide Petitioner's representation dated 02.01.2017 by passing a speaking order so that it is known as to why Pay Scales of SAs cannot be at par with STAs, particularly when they have no further promotional avenues even after rendering 30 years' service and are stagnating.

7. Pursuant to the directions of the Court, the matter was reconsidered by JNU and by a letter dated 19.04.2018, it was communicated that Petitioner was not entitled for upgradation at par with STA and there was no question of stagnation, as upgradations were available under the ACP and MACP Schemes. Representation was, therefore, rejected. Since JNU had, in the rejection letter, relied on a letter issued by Ministry of Human Resource Development (`MHRD') dated 08.04.1998, reflecting the scales of SA and STA under 4th CPC, copy of the letter w