IMPORTANT POINT
Past services of a professor can be counted for promotion under UGC regulations, regardless of whether the previous pay scale was higher than UGC standards.

JUDGMENT :

VIJAY BISHNOI, C.J.

1. The instant writ appeal is filed by the appellant University being aggrieved with the judgment and order dated 18.10.2019 passed by the learned Single Judge in WP (C) No. 131/2015, whereby the learned Single Judge, while allowing the writ petition filed on behalf of the writ petitioner/respondent No. 1 (hereinafter to be referred as ‘the private respondent’), directed the appellant University to place the case of the private respondent before the Executive Committee for consideration/re-consideration for promoting him to Professor (Stage- VI)/Higher Academic Grade (HAG) from a date he became eligible to be promoted by counting the 5(five) years of service rendered by him as Professor of Kasturba Medical College, Manipal University and 5(five) years of service as Professor in Mizoram University provided he fulfills the other eligibility/qualifications required for being promoted.

The learned Single Judge further observed that the appellant University should also keep in mind the fact that the private respondent had, in any event, completed 10(ten) years of service as professor in Mizoram University prior to his retirement. It was further directed that the exercise for reconsidering the case of the private respondent for promotion to the Professorship (Stage-VI)/HAG pay scale should be completed by the appellant University within 3(three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of the order.

The learned Single Judge had set aside the Minutes of the 41st Executive Council Meeting of the Mizoram University held on 20.02.2015 and also set aside the consequential letter dated 03.03.2015 issued by the Mizoram University.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the private respondent, while serving as Professor in the Department of Radiobiology at Kasturba Medical College, Manipal University, was offered appointment to the post of Professor in the Department of Zoology in Mizoram University vide letter dated 02.01.2007 and was appointed to the said post of Professor in Mizoram University vide order dated 22.08.2007 in the pay-scale of Rs. 16,400-450-20900-500-22,400/- plus usual allowance as admissible under Mizoram University, w.e.f. 19.02.2007.

However, the request of the private respondent for promotion/entitlement of benefits of the post of Professor (Stage-VI)/HAG pay-scale under Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) had been rejected by the Executive Committee of the Mizoram University in its 41st Executive Council Meeting dated 20.02.2015.

3. Being aggrieved with the same, the private respondent preferred writ petition, being WP (C) No. 131/2015 while claiming 2(two) reliefs: firstly, to issue a direction to the appellant University to give arrear of pay as per pay fixation given in the order dated 29.09.2011, issued by the Registrar of the Mizoram University and secondly, to issue a direction to the appellant University to count past services of the private respondent herein rendered as Professor in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal University for promotion/ entitlement of the benefits of Professor (Stage-VI)/HAG pay-scale under Career Advancement Scheme.

4. It is noticed that during the pendency of the writ petition, the arrears of pay as per the pay-fixation given in the order dated 29.09.2011 had been paid to the private respondent and therefore, the only question, left to be decided by the learned Single Judge, was with regard to the claim of the private respondent for counting his past services as Professor in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal University for the purpose of promotion to Professor (Stage-VI)/HAG pay-scale under the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS).

5. After considering the rival stands, the learned Single Judge had disposed of the writ petition filed by the private respondent and set aside the Minutes of the 41st Executive Council Meeting of the appellant University dated 20.02.2015, whereby the private respondent was denied the benefit of counting of past services as Professor