IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
VAIBHAVI D. NANAVATI, J.
Jitendra Natvarlal Shah - Petitioner
Versus
State of Gujarat & Ors. - Respondents
R/Special Civil Application No. 16544 of 2016 With R/Special Civil Application No. 16547 of 2016
Decided On : 19-07-2024
Promotion - Upgradation of Assistant Lecturers - Rules of 1964, Rules of 1992 - The court analyzed the eligibility criteria for promotion under the Rules of 1964 and the subsequent Rules of 1992, concluding that the petitioner did not meet the necessary qualifications for upgradation to Lecturer.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, an Assistant Lecturer appointed in 1983, sought upgradation to Lecturer based on prior rules allowing such promotion. However, new rules established in 1992 required a Bachelor's degree, which the petitioner did not possess.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner did not meet the qualifications set by the revised Rules of 1992, which required a Bachelor's degree for the post of Lecturer, thus justifying the rejection of the upgradation request.
Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to upgradation to the post of Lecturer based on previous recruitment rules despite not meeting the new qualification criteria.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the eligibility criteria for promotion can be altered by the government, and the petitioner, lacking the required qualifications under the new rules, was not entitled to the benefits of upgradation.
Result: The petitions were dismissed, and the impugned order was upheld.
JUDGMENT :
Vaibhavi D. Nanavati, J.
1. Since the issued involved in both the captioned petitions is the same and analogous, both the petitions are heard and disposed of by this common judgment. The petition being Special Civil Application No.16544 of 2016 be treated as the lead matter.
2. By way of the present petitions, the petitioners challenged the order dated 29.03.2016 passed by the respondent no.1 – authority rejecting the claim of the petitioner for up-gradation.
3. Brief facts leading to filing of the present petitions read thus:-
3.1. The petitioner came to be appointed as Assistant Lecturer on 11.07.1983 on ad-hoc basis in the Textile Chemistry Department of R.C. Technical Institute, Ahmedabad and was lastly serving as Assistant Lecturer in Textile Chemistry Department in RCTI, Ahmedabad and retired with effect from 14.06.2016 and thus, from the date of joining till the date of retirement, all though, the petitioner worked on post of Assistant Lecturer, the same was without any promotion.
3.2. It is the case of the petitioner that by order dated 20.04.1992, the services of the petitioner came to be regularized with effect from 11.07.1983. It is the case of the petitioner that on 19.06.1964, the Government of Gujarat framed the lecturer in Polytechnics Gujarat Educational Service Class-II (Collegiate Branch) Recruitment Rules, 1964 (for short, “the Rules of 1964”) in exercise of powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India for appointment to the post of Lecturer in Engineering Departments in Degree Engineering Colleges and Polytechnics. It is the case of the petitioner that as per clause 2(II) (Alternative), to be eligible for appointment by nomination to the post of lecturer in polytechnics, a candidate must possess diploma in the respective branch of engineering of a recognized institute at least in the second class and must additionally have at least 7 years’ teaching experience in a Degree Engineering College or at least 8 years teaching experience in a polytechnic or at least 7 years professional experience or a combined teaching experience in a Degree Engineering College or a polytechnic and professional experience for a total period of 8 years.
3.3. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner is holding diploma in his respective branch of engineering from a recognized institute in the First Class and is also possessing 8 years’ experience in a polytechnic. The present petitioner would have 8 years’ teaching experience in a polytechnic on 11.07.1983. It is the case of the petitioner that similarly, as per the Non-Technical Lecturer Recruitment Rules, on 18.11.1966, a candidate must be a graduate and post-graduate and have second class in either of them. The said Recruitment Rules are duly produced at Annexure-D.
3.4. It is the case of the petitioner that on 09.11.1981, a Government Resolution was issued by the Education Department, State of Gujarat upon obtaining the consent of the Finance and General Administration Departments for grant of pay-scale of lecturer to all Assistant Lecturers, Senior Instructors in the government and non-government polytechnics drawing pay of Rs.700/- or more on or after 01.04.1979. The said Government Resolution dated 09.11.1981 is duly produced at Annexure-E. The said benefit was granted subject to certain conditions. One of the conditions for grant of pay scale of lecturer was that the appointments of such Assistant Lecturers or Senior Instructors must be in conformity with the Rules of 1964. The other condition was that as soon as the Assistant Lecturers were given the higher grade, their post would automatically stand upgraded as Lecturer. It was also noted that a similar benefit was given to Assistant Lecturers or Senior Instructors in Degree Engineering Colleges vide Government Resolution dated 11.12.1979.
3.5. It is the case of the petitioner that on 11.04.1984, an order was passed by the Education Department, State of Gujarat in line with Gove
The court established that changes in qualification requirements for promotion are valid and can affect an employee's eligibility for upgradation.
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 : 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....
The denial of UGC scale of pay from the date of regularization based on unjust conditions is discriminatory, violating equal treatment under Article 14.
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.