The Government of Kerala has filed this Writ Petition challenging Ext.P5 order passed by the Mahatma Gandhi University by which the Syndicate Sub Committee on affiliation resolved to approve the promotion of the 1st respondent as Lecturer Senior Scale w.e.f 2.5.2003 fixing her pay in the scale of Rs.10000-325-15200, under the provisions of the UGC scheme. The petitioners seek for a declaration that the University has no authority to grant relaxation/exemption to the qualification prescribed by the University Grants Commission (`UGC' for short) and that appointments/promotions/placements given by the management in the UGC scale to those who do not have the qualification prescribed by the UGC and the approval of such appointments by the University are not binding on the Government or the departmental authorities. The petitioners also challenge the letter of the University-Ext.P7 as well as the decision of the Syndicate Sub-committee held on 25.8.2004, which is referred to in Ext.P7.

2. The 1st respondent was initially appointed as Lecturer in Mathematics in Bishop Abraham Memorial College, Thruthikkad, (BAM College) which is an aided college and she worked there for the period from 27.8.1990 to 26.3.1991. She was thereafter re-appointed as Lecturer in Mathematics in the State scale of Rs.2060-3025, as per Ext.P1 with effect from 2.12.1998, against a vacancy which arose on account of increase in work load. That appointment was approved by the University w.e.f 2.12.1998 as per Ext.P2 order dated 15.11.2000. Thereafter, on the basis of request from the 1st respondent and after being convinced of the sufficiency of workload, Government accorded concurrence for creation of one post of Lecturer in Mathematics, as per Ext.P3 letter dated 20.03.2001. The 1st respondent had acquired M.Phil degree in December, 1994. Reckoning her M.Phil Degree, the 2nd respondent Manager placed her in Senior Scale on completion of 5 years of service. Immediately on such placement by the Manager w.e.f 2.5.2003, the same was forwarded for approval to the University and the University approved her placement w.e.f 2.5.2003 as per Ext.P5 order. For the purpose of granting her placement, the Manager had taken into account her temporary service also, rendered for the period from 27.8.1990 to 26.3.1991, towards these 5 years.

3. The contention of the Government was that UGC scheme was introduced and implemented in the case of Teachers of Colleges with effect from 1.1.1986, as per Government order dated 13.3.1990. A pass in National Eligibility Test (`NET' for short) along with other academic qualifications are compulsory for appointment as teachers in colleges, after 13.3.1990, the date from which the UGC Scheme was introduced in the State. The 1st respondent, though was appointed initially for the period from 27.8.1990 to 26.3.1991, has not passed NET. Therefore, it is the case of the petitioners/Government that the 1st respondent is not qualified for appointment as Lecturer or for placement in the Senior Scale. According to the petitioners, the University does not have any power to dilute the qualifications fixed by the UGC. Similarly temporary service rendered for a period not less than one year is not liable to be reckoned for placement in Senior Scale under the UGC Scheme. The petitioners therefore submit that, grant of Senior Scale reckoning the unqualified service rendered by the 1st respondent is contrary to law and violative of the provisions contained in the regulations of the UGC. Seeing these irregularities, the educational authorities approached the University pointing out that the approval granted for the placement/promotion of the 1st respondent as Lecturer Senior Scale as well as the reckoning of the temporary service rendered by her, with a duration of only less than one year, for her placement/promotion as Senior Scale are illegal and in violation of the provisions contained in the UGC Scheme.

4. The Government had issued Ext.P6 order-G.O