Point of Law : UGC regulations – Government order – not affect any accrued right of the teachers and academic staff based on the "UGC Regulations, 2018"/"UGC Regulations, 2010.

JUDGMENT :

Since the issues canvassed, projected and impelled in these matters are common, I have heard them together and propose to dispose them of through this judgment.

2. The constitutive issue involved is whether there is any conflict between the Government of India Order (hereinafter referred to as “GOI Pay Scale Order”), accepting the recommendations of the Pay Review Committee (PRC) of the University Grants Commission (UGC) with respect to the pay scales of teachers and equivalent cadres in

Universities and Colleges, on the one hand; and between the “UGC Regulations on minimum qualifications for appointment of teachers and other academic staff in Universities and Colleges and measures for the Maintenance of Standards in Higher Education, 2018 (hereinafter referred to as the “UGC Regulations, 2018”), on the other.

3. This question has arisen because it is admitted that the Government of Kerala adopted

both these orders and Regulations respectively, through valid proceedings; but then, while adopting the 'UGC Regulations 2018’, through order dated 29.09.2019, it introduced a caveat that, in the event of any conflict between the provisions of the said Regulations and the order of the Government of Kerala adopting the 'GOI Pay Scale Order', the latter would prevail.

4. This particular condition incorporated by the Government in the aforementioned order, gave rise to a question whether the advance increments mentioned in 'UGC Regulations 2018' would become ungrantable to the petitioners, because the Government of Kerala Order adopting the 'GOI Pay Scale Order' contained a stipulation -couched in Clause 6.1.7 thereof -that no incentives in the form of advance increments may be available to any person for obtaining the degree of M.Phil/Ph.D.

5. The petitioners contend that Government of Kerala was wrong in making the afore inhibition because there can be no conflict between the ‘GOI Pay Scale Order’ and the ‘UGC Regulations 2018’; especially since the latter was issued at a subsequent point of time and which was in continuation of the earlier UGC Regulations of the year 2010 (‘UGC Regulations 2010’).

6. I have heard Sri.George Poonthottam, learned Senior Counsel – instructed by Sri.A.L.Navaneeth Krishnan, Sri.Deepu Lal Mohan, Sri.Arun B.Varghese – learned counsel appearing for the petitioners; Sri.S.Krishnamoorthy – learned Standing Counsel for the UGC; Smt.Parvathy K. – learned Government Pleader and Sri.P.Sreekumar who assisted this Court commendably as Amicus Curiae.

7. Noticing the rather complex issues projected and the ramifications it may hold in future, I though it necessary to requisition the assistance of an Amicus Curiae and requested Sri.P.Sreekumar to do so. His inputs and assistance in this matter certainly helped this Court in arriving at the judgment that I am presently delivering.

8. For the purpose of this judgment, propose to treat WP(C)No.8213/2020 as the lead case and all reference to the documents and parties will be as reflected therein, unless otherwise specified.

9. Sri.George Poonthottam, learned Senior Counsel and Sri.Deepu Lal Mohan, learned counsel, made vehement submissions to the effect that Government of Kerala has mixed up two different Regulations and has virtually said that the provisions of one will override the other. They argued that since the 'GOI Pay Revision Order' and the ‘UGC Regulations’ – be that the 2010 or the 2018 – operate on different spheres, there can be no conflict between them; and consequently, one cannot override the other. They predicated that the 'GOI Pay Revision Order' was intended to regulate the Pay and Allowances of teachers under the UGC Scheme; while ‘UGC Regulations 2010/2018’ are intended to promote excellence in teaching and to incentivise it appositely. They argued that, therefore, the incentives stipulated in the ‘UGC Regulations 2010/2018’ would become applicable to the teachers on the specific criteria therein being satisfied; notwithstanding what is stated in the '