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

2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 1658

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Mr. Sanjeev Gupta, Mrs. Pragya Sahay Saksena, JJ
Dr Tehseen Hassan – Appellant
Versus
D/o Health And Medical Education Ut Of Jammu & Kashmir – Respondent
T.A./6700/2021



Advocates:
Mr. Aseem Kumar Sawhney, Mr. Sudesh Magotra, Mr. Pranav Kohli, Mr. Sachin Dev Singh, Mr. Arun Dev Singh

The validity of a Ph.D. degree must be verified according to UGC Regulations for determining eligibility for promotion and seniority in employment.

Headnote:(A) J&K Medical Education (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1979 - UGC Regulations, 2009 - Appointment and seniority of Assistant Professor - Applicant sought confirmation of appointment as I/c Assistant Professor, Bio-Chemistry, after being reverted to Lecturer - Court directed verification of Ph.D. validity as per UGC Regulations, 2009, and to consider applicant for promotion if valid. (Paras 20, 21)

(B) Employment Law - Promotion and seniority - The court emphasized that the applicant's promotion must be based on valid qualifications and adherence to service rules, particularly regarding the Ph.D. degree. (Paras 11, 12)

Facts of the case:
The applicant was appointed as Lecturer in Bio-Chemistry in 2014 and later made I/c Assistant Professor in 2017. She was reverted after another candidate was promoted despite the applicant's Ph.D. being acknowledged. The applicant challenged the reversion and sought confirmation of her position. (Paras 2.1, 2.2)

Findings of Court:
The court found that the applicant's Ph.D. degree's validity must be verified according to UGC Regulations, and if valid, she should be reinstated with seniority. (Paras 20, 21)

Issues: The main issues were the validity of the applicant's Ph.D. degree and the implications for her promotion and seniority. (Paras 12, 19)

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the verification of the Ph.D. degree's validity is essential for determining the applicant's eligibility for promotion, emphasizing adherence to UGC Regulations. (Paras 20, 21)

Result: O.A. No. 762 of 2021 and O.A. No. 459 of 2023 disposed of with directions for verification of the Ph.D. degree.

ORDER

(Per: Mrs. Pragya Sahay Saksena, Administrative Member)

The Applicant filed one writ petition and two O.A.s in which she has sought confirmation of her appointment as I/c Assistant Professor, Bio-Chemistry, Department of Bio-Chemistry, Government Medical College, Jammu and seniority vis-a-vis private respondents mentioned in the T.A./O.A.s. Since all the three petitions/applications deal with overlapping issues, the facts of the case and the relief sought in the T.A. and the two O.A.s are as under:-

2. Facts of the case:

2.1 The facts of the case as emerging from the T.A. and the O.A.s are that the applicant was appointed as Lecturer in Bio-Chemistry Department of Government Medical College, Jammu vide Government Order No. 233-HME of 2014 dated 23.04.2014 and prior to this date she had completed her coursework from Bhagwant University, Sikar Road, Ajmer, Rajasthan and her thesis titled ‘Elucidation of Genetic Alterations to Understand the Biology of the Breast Cancer Patients in Ethnic Population of Kashmir’ was also submitted and acknowledged by university authorities vide letter dated 08.04.2014.

2.2 It is further averred that the applicant was under psychiatric treatment at Psychiatry Department, Srinagar due to death of her child and could not conclude her viva-voce for the Ph.D. and discontinued it for the period 2014-2016. Thereafter, she requested the university to consider her case and accordingly she went for viva voce for one day and cleared the same on 03.02.2017 in Bio- Chemistry. At that time, she was deputed at GMC, Srinagar as Faculty where the winter vacations were from 01.01.2017 to 28.01.2017 and from 01.02.2017 to 28.02.2017. Hence no leave was availed by the applicant as the viva voce was during winter vacations i.e. 03.02.2017. She was finally awarded Ph.D. on 11.09.2017. In view of the required experience of 3 years as lecturer for Non-medical stream as per required rules (J&K Medical Education (Gazetted) Service Recruitment Rules, 1979 (SRO 517)), the applicant was placed as I/c Assistant Professor vide Government Order No.673-HME of 2017 dated 18.12.2017. Subsequent to this, vide Government Order No. 259-HME of 2018 dated 10.04.2018, a judgment of the Division Bench of Hon’ble High Court of J&K was implemented whereby Dr. Kapila Raina was promoted/placed as Assistant Professor, Bio- Chemistry Department GMC and the Applicant was reverted to the post of Lecturer. It is further averred that the applicant was appointed as Lecturer, Bio-Chemistry Department, Government Medical College, Jammu in 2014. Since she acquired Ph.D. Degree in 2017, she was made in-charge Assistant Professor, Bio-Chemistry Department, GMC vide Govt. order No. 673-HME of 2017 dated 18.12.2017 and she joined against the said post on the same date. Thereafter, the process for her confirmation was initiated and the matter was to be placed before the DPC/PSC but unfortunately Respondent No. 1 vide Government Order No. 259-HME of 2018 dated 10.04.2018, promoted Ms. Kapila Raina as I/C Assistant professor, Bio-Chemistry though the date on which the Applicant joined as I/c Assistant Professor, Ms. Kapila Raina was not eligible to be appointed as I/c Assistant Professor as she was not in possession of Ph.D. qualification on that date, which she acquired subsequent to the date of appointment of the applicant.Further, the Hon’ble Division Bench of J&K High Court, vide order dated 26.04.2017, had directed the university, i.e., JNU, Jaipur to declare the result of Ms. Kapila Raina within a period of two weeks from the date of the judgment, however, her result was not declared in two weeks’ time and she qualified only on 19.12.2017 which is subsequent to the timeline given in the order and also to the joining of the applicant. Since the degree was not conferred within 2 weeks rather after 8 months of the order, the benefit of the deeming clause would not be available in such a situation. The Applicant filed SWP No. 692 of 2018 against the Gover

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