Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 38622
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2024 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE B M SHYAM PRASAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6924 OF 2022 (S-PRO)
BETWEEN:
DR PRIYA N (M.SC., PH.D) AGED ABOUT 41 YEARS, W/O SRIHARI SRINIVASAN, ASSISTANT ADVISER, NATIIONAL ASSESSMENT AND ACCREDITATIION COUNCIL, P O BOX NO.1075 Digitally signed NAGARBHAVI, by VINAYAKA B V Location: HIGH BANGALORE-560072 COURT OF KARNATAKA …PETITIONER DHARWAD BENCH DHARWAD (BY SRI. H. SUBRAMANYA JOIS, SENIOR ADVOCATE Date: 2024.08.09 15:16:59 +0530 FOR SRI. K. SATISH, ADVOCATE.
AND:
1. THE NATIONAL ASSESSMENT AND ACCREDITATION (AN AUTONOMOUS INSTITUTION OF THE UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION)
P O BOX NO.1075, NAGARBHAVI, BANGALORE-560072 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR
2. THE UNIVERISTY GRANTS COMMISSION (MINISTRY OF EDUCATION)
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, BHADURSHAH ZAFAR MARG, NEW DELHI-110002 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. T P MUTHANNA., ADVOCATE FOR R1;
SRI. H. R. SHOWRI, ADVOCATE FOR R2)
THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND
227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS IN GENERAL AND THE FIRST RESPONDENT IN PARTICULAR, TO COUNT AND CONSIDER HER PAST REGULAR SERVICES RENDERED BEFORE HER JOINING THE SERVICES OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT AS CONTINUOUS REGULAR SERVICE FOR THE PURPOSE OF HER PROMOTION TO CADRE OF DEPUTY ADVISER IN THE SERVICE OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT AGAINST THE VACANCIES IN THE SAID CADRE.
THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
The petitioner has impugned the Endorsement dated 23.03.2022 [Annexure-Q] issued by the National Assessment and Accreditation [the NAAC - the first respondent]. The first respondent has issued this Endorsement dated 23.03.2022 informing the petitioner that her request for promotion to the post of Deputy Adviser cannot be considered because she has not completed the eligible "eight years of regular service as an Assistant Adviser". The petitioner has sought for directions to the respondents, and more specifically to the first respondent, to consider her past service [for the period between 07.03.2011 and 22.08.2017] as an Assistant Professor with the Department of Geography, School of Earth Sciences, Central University of Karnataka for the purposes of promotion to the cadre of Deputy Adviser and for direction to consider promoting her to the cadre of Deputy Adviser with retrospective effect and grant all consequential benefits with such retrospective effect.
2. The undisputed facts are that the petitioner has worked as an Assistant Professor with the Department of Geography, School of Earth Sciences, Central University of Karnataka [the Central University] for the period between 07.03.2011 and
22.08.2017. The petitioner has applied for appointment to the post of Assistant Adviser [Unreserved - UR] with the NAAC after the Central University's Order dated 22.08.2017. This order refers to the petitioner retaining lien over her post with the University for a period of one year as per the Government of India norms. Thereafter, NAAC, on the petitioner’s selection, has issued appointment order vide order dated 23.08.2017 to the petitioner appointing her as Assistant Adviser [UR] inter alia on the condition that she would be on probation for a period of two years from the date of appointment subject to extension at the discretion of the competent authority.
3. The petitioner’s probation is declared on
05.12.2019 [Annexure-C]. The petitioner has requested for fixation of pay considering her service with the Central University. The NAAC vide its order dated 10.08.2018 [Annexure-D] has fixed her pay protecting her services as an Assistant Professor with the Central University. The petitioner has filed repeated representations for promotion to the cadre of Deputy Adviser. Admittedly, the NAAC's Byelaw and the appended Cadre Recruitment Rules stipulate that for the purposes of promotion to the cadre of the Deputy Adviser, amongst others, a candidate must have completed eight years of combined service as an Assistant Professor in a College/University in a particular pay band [including AGP] and that such candidate must have completed eight years of service in the feeder cadre viz., the cadre of Assistant Adviser.
4. Sri. H. Subramanya Jois, the learned Senior counsel for the petitioner, contends that the petitioner's past service [service as an Assistant Professor with the Department of Geography, Central University] is protected even for the purposes of promotion to the cadre of Deputy Adviser because of the Office Memorandum dated 01.09.1998 issued by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions [Department of Personnel and Training], Government of India. When Sri. T. P. Muthanna, the learned counsel for the NAAC is heard in the light of this canvass, he submits that this would be only if the posts of Assistant Professor [a teaching job] could be equated with the post of Assistant Adviser and if it cannot be equated accordingly, the petitioner would not possess the eligible eight years of service in the feeder cadre for granting promotions to the next cadre [the cadre of Deputy Advisers].
5. Sri. H. Subramanya Jois, to persuade this Court to opine that the petitioner’s service as an Assistant Professor must be considered along with her service as an Assistant Adviser with the NAAC for promotion, relies upon the following circumstances.
a) The petitioner's past service is protected for the purposes of pay fixation in the pay
