IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Rajiv Shakdher, Talwant Singh, JJ.
Govt. of NCT of Delhi - Appellant
Versus
Amira Nisar (Dr.) - Respondent
W.P.(C) 6026 of 2021 & CM Appls. 19057-58 of 2021
Decided On : 07-01-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. eligibility of past service for cas benefits (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. details of the respondent's employment and timeline (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. submissions made by both parties regarding past services (Para 7 , 8) |
| 4. court's analysis of past service eligibility criteria (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. flaws in petitioners' objections regarding qualifications (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. court's final judgment regarding cas benefits (Para 18 , 19) |
JUDGMENT
Rajiv Shakdher, J.
Table of Contents
Preface:
Background:
Submissions on behalf of the petitioners:
Submissions on behalf of the respondent:
Analysis and reasons:
Conclusion:
Preface:
1. This writ petition is directed against the judgment dated 13.10.2020, read with the order dated 21.01.2021, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal [in short, the "Tribunal"] in O.A. No.1119/2019 and M.A. No.46/2021.
1.1. Via the impugned judgment, the Tribunal has allowed the original application [`O.A.'] preferred by the respondent.
1.2. The short issue which arises for consideration is whether the petitioners should take into account the past services rendered by the respondent with her previous employer.
1.3. From the point of view of the respondent, this aspect has attained criticality, as she has been denied the benefits envisaged under the Career Advancement Scheme [in short "CAS"]. The denial of benefits under CAS has resulted in the respondent not being granted senior scale.
Background:
2. Before we proceed further, the following broad facts are required to be noticed :
2.1. The respondent was appointed as Lecturer (Electrical Engineering) [in short "Lecturer (EE)"] in BSF Polytechnic on 31.03.2000, pursuant to an advertisement issued on 8-14.05.1999 [in short "the 1999 advertisement"].
2.2. At the point in time, when the 1999 advertisement was issued by BSF Polytechnic, the notification dated 20.09.1989 [in short "the 1989 notification"] read with the Guidelines for Career Advancement of Lecturers in Polytechnics dated 10.09.1993,issued by All India Council for Teacher Education (AICTE), was in vogue.
2.3. It is pertinent to note that the qualifications prescribed under the 1989 notification prescribed were as follows:
| No. | Cadre | Qualification and Experience |
| 1. | Lecturer | (i) 1st Class Bachelor's Degree in appropriate branch of engineering/technology. OR M.Sc. 1st Class in appropriate branch of study for teaching posts and humanities and sciences. (ii) Qualifying in All-India Examination (such as GATE or equivalent) (iii) Selected through the prescribed selection procedure. |
2.4. As against this, the 1999 advertisement prescribed the following [relevant] qualifications for the post of Lecturer (EE):
"1. Lecturer (Electrical Engg.): 01 post (Rs.8000-275-13500) DA, HRA and CCA as per BSF Central Education Fund Rules
Educational qualifications:
Essential
B.E (Electrical) in 1st Class from a recognized University
Desirable
i) Qualifying in an All India Examination (such as GATE or equivalent)
ii) Competent to teach in both Hindi and English.
Age: Less than 40 years
Experience: At least 3 years teaching experience in a recognized Polytechnic or Degree Engineering college in the field of Electrical Engg. "
3. At this juncture, it is pertinent to note that the respondent claims she was granted senior scale by her erstwhile employer i.e., BSF Education Society with the issuance of the order dated 31.01.2007.
3.1. We may note that this aspect is disputed by the petitioners. The petitioners claim that the respondent continued in the pay scale Rs.8000-13500/- till she resigned from BSF Polytechnic on 27.09.2010.
3.2. According to the petitioners, had the above-mentioned order dated 31.01.2007 been given, effect to, the respondent would have been upgraded to Rs.10,000-15,200/- pay scale.
3.3. We may note that, on 30.12.1999, AICTE issued a notification [in short "the 1999 notification"], which, inter alia, provided in Clause 8.2(i) that a Lecturer will be eligible for placemen
The respondent is entitled to Career Advancement Scheme benefits based on her prior service in accordance with AICTE guidelines, as her qualifications were deemed sufficient.
Public orders made by public authorities are meant to have public effect and are intended to affect the actings and conduct of those to whom they are addressed and must be construed objectively with ....
Lecturers appointed before January 1, 1996 are entitled to selection grade benefits without needing a Master’s degree, ensuring equal treatment in service matters.
Point of Law : Where range of discretion with authorities have been cut down to such an extent that only one decision is possible, Court may specifically direct authority to act in a particular manne....
power of the Government to make laws determining the service conditions of its employees or amend such laws cannot confer them the power to apply such laws differently to similarly situated persons.
(1) There is distinction between re-designation and regular appointment – Redesignation cannot be said to be a regular appointment.(2) Promotion – Whenever a Scheme/Policy is brought into force, cete....
The Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) is not applicable to the College of Accountancy and Management Studies (CAMS) due to its distinct staffing structure, and eligibility for promotion under the CAS r....
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.