IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
V. Kameswar Rao, J.
Kiran Gupta - Appellant
Versus
University of Delhi - Respondent
W.P.(C) 10564 of 2019, W.P.(C) 10744 of 2019 and W.P.(C) 10789 of 2019, CM No. 44576 of 2019
Decided On : 08-03-2021
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. promotion eligibility and timeline requirements. (Para 2 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 2. arguments for retrospective promotion based on eligibility. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 3. court's analysis of promotion criteria under ugc regulations. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
| 4. final order allowing petitions and retrospective promotion. (Para 21) |
JUDGMENT
V. Kameswar Rao, J. (ORAL)--As identical issues arise for consideration in these three writ petitions, they are decided through this common order.
2. In substance, the prayer of the petitioners in these petitions is that they should be promoted to the post of Professor from the post of Associate Professor with effect from their date of eligibility and not from the date of interview i.e. June 25, 2019.
3. For a decision in the writ petitions, it is necessary to note certain facts in each of the writ petitions and the same shall be narrated separately.
FACTS IN W.P.(C) 10564/2019
4. The petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer on ad-hoc basis in the year 1986 in the Faculty of law, University of Delhi on August 04, 1992. After meeting all the requirements of the University of Delhi, the petitioner was absorbed as a Lecturer on permanent basis on the roll of Faculty of Law, University of Delhi. On October 14, 1996, the petitioner was promoted as Lecturer, Senior Scale from the date of her eligibility i.e. August 04, 1994. On February 19, 2000, she was promoted as Reader w.e.f. July 27, 1998 that is the, date of her eligibility.
5. On January 01, 2006 the post of Reader, on which the petitioner was working, was re-designated as Assistant Professor. In the year 2010, the University Grants Commission (`UGC', for short) respondent No.2 came out with regulations in relation to service conditions of Teachers. On April 24, 2014, the UGC had issued a notification stating that promotion under the Career Advancement Scheme (`CAS', for short) shall be governed by the UGC Regulations, which are in operation on the date of eligibility, not on the date of interview.
6. On May 29, 2017, the petitioner applied for promotion to the post of Professor. On June 25, 2019, 10 candidates were called for the interview, petitioner being one of them. Out of the 10 candidates, one candidate was absent. Out of the remaining 9 candidates considered for promotion, 8 candidates were recommended for the same. Out of the 8 candidates, 3 candidates were promoted from the date of their eligibility for being appointed as Professors, whereas the other 5 remaining candidates were promoted from the date of interview i.e. June 25, 2019. Pursuant thereto, the University issued a communication dated July 04, 2019 promoting the petitioner as Professor in Law Centre-II, Faculty of Law w.e.f. June 25, 2019. The minutes of the Selection Committee were approved by the Executive Council on July 01-02, 2019. Suffice to state, it is this order and the resolution of the Executive Council/minutes of the selection committee which have been challenged by the petitioner in this petition.
FACTS IN W.P.(C) 10744/2019
7. In this petition, the facts, as noted from the writ petition are, that the petitioner joined the respondent No.1 University as a Lecturer on May 11, 2005. The petitioner was promoted as Lecturer in Senior Scale w.e.f. May 11, 2005. The petitioner was further promoted to the post of Lecturer (Selection Grade) w.e.f. September 15, 2008. She was also promoted to the post of Associate Professor w.e.f. September 15, 2011. In the case of this petitioner also, the facts with regard to the deliberations of the Selection Committee/approval of the Council/order of appointment are identical to the writ petition being W.P.(C) 10564/2019.
FACTS IN W.P.(C) 10789/2019
8. The facts as noted from the writ petition are, that the petitioner was appointed as ad-hoc Lecturer in Faculty of Law, University of Delhi on March 13, 1995. On April 01, 2005, she was appointed as a Lecturer on regular basis in Law Centre-I
Promotion of teachers must relate back to the date of eligibility per UGC regulations, not just the interview date.
It is not necessary for Selection Committee to give reasons for its conclusion, suffice to state, Supreme Court had given a finding to that effect in cases where the rules do not contemplate so. Ther....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that promotion to the post of Professor (Stage-5) should relate back to the date of eligibility if the candidate is successful, as provided in Clau....
The main legal point established is that the date of promotion should align with the date of eligibility unless the candidate falls under specific exceptions.
Promotion eligibility under UGC regulations must be honored, and government financial concerns cannot unjustly hinder rightful promotions.
The main legal principle established is that UGC Regulations, 2010 have prospective effect and candidates who fulfill eligibility criteria before the enforcement of the regulations can be considered ....
Eligibility for promotion under the Career Advancement Scheme requires active service status on the date of consideration, as per UGC Regulations.
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.