University approvals for teacher promotions must be honored by Government authorities, who cannot contest educational qualifications retrospectively if properly appointed.

JUDGMENT

The petitioner who is working as Selection Grade Lecturer in Syriac in the first respondent's college, is aggrieved by the refusal to disburse salary and other benefits in the promoted post of Senior Grade Lecturer with effect from 26.9.2000. The main contention raised in the writ petition is that as the University has granted approval for the appointment of the petitioner as Lecturer and later his promotion as Lecturer Senior Grade, the Government cannot refuse to disburse the salary. Reliance is placed on two Division Bench decisions of this court inCherian Mathew v. Principal, S.B. College, Changanacherry ( 1998 (2) KLT 144 ) and Shalini Rachel v.

Manager, Christian College (2007 (3) KLT 355).

2. The bare facts for the disposal of the writ petition are the following: The petitioner was selected and appointed as Lecturer with effect from 26.9.1994 by a statutory selection committee after due process of selection. He was appointed in one of the two sanctioned posts for the subject in Syriac. His appointment was in the retirement vacancy of Fr. Thomas Kanjirathumootil. The approval has been granted by the University wpc 34582/2008 2 for the said appointment as per Ext.P1(a). He was promoted as Senior Grade lecturer with effect from 26.9.2000 by the management and the same was approved by the University as per Ext.P2 dated 4.8.2007. Later, by Ext.P3 he was promoted as Lecturer Selection Grade also. After Ext.P2 approval was granted, the Principal submitted the proposal for the claim and disbursement of salary in the post of Lecturer Senior Scale which is evidenced by Ext.P4. Ext.P5 is the request forwarded by the petitioner to the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education seeking disbursement of salary and by Ext.P5(a) it was informed that the matter is under consideration by the Director of Collegiate Education. The petitioner is relying upon Exts.P6 and P6(a) judgments of this court wherein, this court after following the dictum laid down in Cherian Mathew's case ( 1998 (2) KLT 144 ), directed the disbursement of salary to the petitioners.

3. The respondents have filed counter affidavits and the petitioner has filed a reply affidavit also. It is the contention of the third respondent that as per the U.G.C. Regulations, postgraduate degree in the concerned subject with at least 55% marks should be there and the petitioner should have cleared the eligibility test, i.e. NET. In the absence of the same, the approval granted as per Ext.P2 by the University cannot be supported. The petitioner is not entitled to get exemption from NET qualification also. It is wpc 34582/2008 3 the further contention of the third respondent that the work load does not support the approval granted. It is also pointed out that the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education had requested the University as per letter dated 12.11.2008 to re-examine the orders approving promotion as Lecturer Senior Scale in respect of the petitioner and the University has not issued any clarification in the matter.

4. The University in its counter affidavit, has pointed out that the University granted approval of appointment as Lecturer in Syriac before the implementation of the U.G.C. Regulations. He had completed six years of service and had attended one orientation course and one refresher course. It is also averred that the University did not receive any objection regarding the validity of the approval granted, at that point of time.

5. At the time of hearing, learned Standing Counsel for the University submitted that the objections received from the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education and the Principal Secretary to the Government, were considered by the Syndicate Standing Committee on Affiliation in its meeting held on 20.7.2009 and it was resolved not to review the promotion already given to the petitioner as he was appointed on 26.9.1994 with the qualification prescribed in the regulations relevant at that point of time and no NET is being conducted for Syriac and