IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT JAMMU
WASIM SADIQ NARGAL, J.
Sh. Surinder Kumar Gupta S/o Late Sh. Krishan Dass Gupta – Appellant
Versus
University of Jammu through Registrar Baba Saheb Ambedkar Road, Jammu – Respondent
SWP No. 895 of 2013
Decided on : 03-03-2025
(A) Writ of Certiorari - Quashing of orders - The petitioner sought to quash two orders regarding placement in selection grade and service benefits, claiming they were arbitrary and illegal. The respondents argued that the petitioner was rightly placed based on University Council decisions. (Paras 1-8)
(B) Non-prosecution - The court dismissed the petition for non-prosecution as the petitioner failed to appear after a significant delay, indicating no further purpose in keeping the case pending. (Paras 2, 8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought to challenge the placement in selection grade and service benefits, claiming entitlement based on University guidelines. The respondents contended that the petitioner was appropriately placed based on established criteria and decisions.
Findings of Court:
The court found that the grievance of the petitioner had been addressed and dismissed the petition for non-prosecution and on merits.
Issues: The main issues included the legality of the orders regarding selection grade placement and the petitioner’s entitlement based on service duration.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioner’s claims were unfounded as the University had followed its guidelines and the grievance was resolved.
Result: Petition dismissed.
ORDER :
1. Through the medium of instant petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:-
“(i) An appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari whereby quashing the order of respondent No.1 bearing No. Estab./13/18802 dated 07.01.2013 as the same is patently illegal, arbitrary, not in terms of the judgment/order of this Court as well as University Notification/Guidelines and also on the analogy of Kashmir University.
(ii) An appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of certiorari whereby quashing the order of respondent No. 1 bearing No. Estab./2000/1300-6 dated 15.5.2000 so far as it relates to allowing the selection grade w.e.f. 13.2.1991 instead of 7.8.1988 also being patently illegal, arbitrary and against the University Notification and recommendation of experts which were approved by the then Registrar and Controller of examination as well as Financial Advisor to Universities.
(iii) An appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus whereby directing the respondents to place the petitioner as Asstt. Librarian Selection grade carrying pre revised pay scale of Rs.3700-5700 w.e.f. 7.8.1988 instead of 13.2.1991 in terms of Cl9(1)(a)(iii) of University Notification dated 13.3.1990 and accordingly settle, release and pay all the consequently service benefits to the petitioner.
(iv) Any other writ, order or direction befitting the occasion may please also be allowed in favour of the petitioner and against the respondents.
2. The record reveals that in the instant petition, notice was issued on 26.04.2013 and the last date of hearing in the case was 15.05.2015. Since then, the petitioner has not made any effort to get the instant petition listed and this petition has come up for hearing after ten years. Today, when the instant petition was taken up, none appeared on behalf of the petitioner.
3. Objections stand filed on behalf of the respondents, in which the respondents have taken a preliminary objection that the University Council vide its Resolution No. 61 dated 06.10.1989 approved the Modalities/Procedure for placement of Teachers, Assistant Registrars/Assistant Librarians and Assistant Director of Physical Education in Senior Scale/Selection Grade,whereunder at point 9, it was inter-alia observed as under:-
“Point-9:-Placement/Promotion of Assistant Librarians/Assistant Director of Physical Education to the post of Deputy Librarian /Dy. Director of Physical Education.
(i) That every Assistant Librarian and Assistant Director of Physical Education who has been placed in the Senior Scale will be eligible for promotion to the post of Deputy Director Librarian and Deputy Director of Physical Education respectively in the scale of pay of Rs. 3700-5700 if he has;
(a) Completed 08 years of service in the senior scale; provided that the requirement of 08 years will be relaxed if his total service is not less than 16 years.
(b) Obtained a Ph. D Degree an equivalent published work;
(c) Made significant contributions to the development of Library services/ Physical Education in the University as evidenced by self assessment reports of referees, professional improvement in the Library services/Physical Education activities etc., as the case may be ;
(d) Participated in refresher courses/summer institutes for a total duration of approximately 08 weeks or engaged in other appropriate continuing education programme comparable quality as may be specified by the UGC, after placement in the senior scale. However, the condition of their participation in refresher course / summer institutes as mentioned above be relaxed up to the end- of December, 1990. Meanwhile the process of deputing teachers for attending refresher courses in the Academic Staff College be initiated. The work of deputees during the period of their deputation be carried out by making internal arrangement.
(e) Consistently good performance appraisal reports.
(ii) Promotion to the post of Deputy Librarian/Deputy Directo
The court upheld the University’s decision regarding placement in selection grade, emphasizing adherence to established guidelines and dismissing the petition for non-prosecution.
The court emphasized the principle of parity in treatment for similarly situated individuals, directing the authorities to grant benefits under government resolutions.
The court ruled that a reduction in pay without the Executive Committee's approval is invalid, emphasizing the necessity of following proper authority and procedure in employment matters.
The state must apply laws uniformly without discrimination between employees, as inequitable application violates constitutional equality.
The discretionary nature of the powers of the High Court under Article 226, absence of a fixed period for considering delay, and the principle of equality enshrined in the constitution were central l....
Lecturers who meet eligibility criteria for promotion must be granted placement in Selection Grade, regardless of subsequent pay revision orders.
Employees must receive selection grade benefits based on their actual length of service from the date of initial appointment, in accordance with governmental policy.
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.