SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(UK) 256

IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Manoj Kumar Tiwari, Pankaj Purohit, JJ.
Dr. Vidya Sagar Singh - Petitioner
Versus
G.B. Pant University of Agriculture and Technology, Pantnagar & others. - Respondents
Writ Petition (S/B) No.68 of 2020
Decided On : 12-08-2024

Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. C.D. Bahuguna, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Chandra Shekhar & Mr. Ravindra S. Rawat, Advocates
For the Respondent:Mr. G.S. Negi, learned Addl. CSC, Mr. Rajendra Dobal, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Shubhang Dobhal, Advocate

IMPORTANT POINT
Eligibility for counting past service under the Career Advancement Scheme is strictly governed by the conditions set forth in the relevant Government Order.

Headnote:

Career Advancement - Employment Benefits - Government Order 12.07.2002 - The court interpreted the eligibility criteria for counting past service under the Career Advancement Scheme, emphasizing the necessity of meeting specific qualifications and conditions outlined in the Government Order.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner, an Assistant Professor, sought to include his past service as a Veterinary Officer for benefits under the Career Advancement Scheme, which was denied based on eligibility criteria set by a Government Order.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the petitioner did not meet the eligibility requirements outlined in the Government Order for counting past service, and the denial of benefits was justified.

Issues: Whether the petitioner is entitled to have his past service counted for benefits under the Career Advancement Scheme despite not meeting the eligibility criteria.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the eligibility conditions specified in the Government Order must be strictly adhered to, and the petitioner could not claim parity with others who were granted benefits under different circumstances.

Result: The writ petition was dismissed, but the petitioner was to be granted all benefits available to Assistant Professors as per law within three months.

JUDGMENT :

Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

By means of this writ petition, petitioner has sought the following reliefs:

    “I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, summoning the records from G.B. Pant University, Pantnagar, and quashing the impugned order dated 13-12-2019, contained in Annexure-1 to this petition, whereby the claim of the petitioner for adding his past service for extending him benefits under Career Advancement Scheme, has been rejected.

II. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent nos. 1 to 6 to grant benefit of past service, rendered in the Animal Husbandry Department of the State of Rajasthan, to the petitioner for the period 01-04-1998 to 19-02-2007, for availing benefits under ‘Career Advancement Scheme’ with all consequential benefits of service.

III. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondent nos. 1 to 6 to consider the petitioner for promotion to the post of Associate Professor and Professor, adding his past service of 11 years and 10 months, under ‘Career Advancement Scheme’ with all consequential benefits of service.”

2. Petitioner is serving as Assistant Professor in Department of Veterinary Parasitology in G.B. Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, Pantnagar. He was appointed to the said post vide order dated 09.06.2006. It is not in dispute that, before his appointment as Assistant Professor, petitioner was employed in Animal Husbandry Department of State of Rajasthan, where he was appointed as Veterinary Assistant Surgeon vide order dated 24.03.1995 and the said post was re-designated as Veterinary Officer w.e.f. 01.04.1998. The post of Veterinary Officer, on which petitioner served, was carrying pay scale of Rs. 8,000-13,500.

3. After his appointment in G.B. Pant University of Agriculture & Technology, petitioner made representation to add his past services rendered as Veterinary Officer, for availing benefit under Career Advancement Scheme. The Chief Personnel Officer of the University, vide order dated 07.01.2013, allowed petitioner’s representation and permitted adding his past services for grant of benefit under Career Advancement Scheme. The said order, however, was cancelled on 16.09.2013 by the Chief Personnel Officer. In the cancellation order, it was indicated that, in view of recommendation made by the concerned officers, the Competent Authority has decided to cancel the order dated 07.01.2013. Petitioner challenged the cancellation order dated 16.09.2013 by filing Writ Petition (S/B) No. 475 of 2014, which was disposed of vide order dated 14.11.2018, in view of the statement made by learned counsel for the University that Competent Authority will consider petitioner’s claim for benefit of past services, as per law, within two months. The Chief Personnel Officer, thereafter, passed an order dated 21.01.2019 (wrongly mentioned as 21.01.2018 in the order), in which it was provided that the services rendered by the petitioner as Veterinary Officer, shall be counted for benefits under Career Advancement Scheme. The Chief Personnel Officer, however, passed another order on 06.07.2019, whereby the earlier order dated 21.01.2019 was kept in abeyance, till further orders. Challenging this order passed on 06.07.2019, petitioner filed Writ Petition (S/B) No. 498 of 2019, which was disposed of vide order dated 23.10.2019. Paragraph no. 5 of the said order is reproduced below:-

    “5. Needless to state that, in case the respondent-University is satisfied for reasons to be recorded in writing that the petitioner is similarly circumstanced as that of other four Assistant Professors, to then extend to him the benefits which the University has chosen to extend to the other four Assistant Professors. The entire exercise, culminOating in a reasoned order being passed afresh, shall be completed with utmost expedition and, in any event, within a period of six weeks’ from the date of production of a certified co

    Click Here to Read the rest of this document
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10
    11
    SupremeToday Portrait Ad
    supreme today icon
    logo-black

    An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

    Please visit our Training & Support
    Center or Contact Us for assistance

    qr

    Scan Me!

    India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

    For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

    whatsapp-icon Back to top