Serial No. 01 Supplementary List HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA AT SHILLONG WP(C) No. 473 of 2025 Date of Decision :11.02.2026 Smti Teilynti Lyngdoh, W/o (L) Alexander D. Massar, R/o Mawprem, Shillong, East Khasi Hills District, Meghalaya …. Petitioner(s)

Versus

1. State of Meghalaya represented by Commissioner & Secretary to the Govt. of Meghalaya, Education Department, Shillong

2. The Principal Secretary to the Govt. of Meghalaya, Education Department, Shillong.

3. Secretary to the Govt. of Meghalaya, Education Department, Shillong.

4. Under Secretary to the Govt. of Meghalaya, Education Department, Shillong.

5. Director of Higher and Technical Education, Meghalaya, Shillong

6. Joint Secretary to the Govt. of Meghalaya, Education Department, Shillong.

7. The Director, Polytechnic and Shillong Engineering, Shillong.

8. Additional Director, Polytechnic and Shillong Engineering, Shillong

9. Personnel & AR (Department), Shillong, Meghalaya.

10. The Accountant General, (A&E), Meghalaya, Shillong …. Respondent(s)

11. Union of India represented by The Secretary to the Education Department, Govt. of India, New Delhi

12. All India Councial for Technical Education represented by Secretary, New Delhi …. Proforma Respondent(s)

Coram:

Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.S. Thangkhiew, Judge.

Appearance:

For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. S. Sen, Adv. with Ms. E. Blah, Adv. Ms. S. Dhar, Adv.

Ms. S. Shallam, Adv.

For the Respondent(s) : Mr. N.D. Chullai, AAG with Mr. E.R. Chyne, GA (For R 1-6&9)

Ms. E.B. Passah, Adv. (For R 10 Mr. R. Debnath, CGC (For R 11)

Mr. S. Pandey, Adv. (For R 12)

i) Whether approved for reporting in Yes/No Law journals etc:

ii) Whether approved for publication Yes/No in press:

JUDGMENT AND ORDER

1. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner a holder of a First Class Master of Science Degree in Physics, was appointed as a Lecturer at the Shillong Polytechnic School in 09.01.1995. At the time of appointment, her service conditions were governed by State Government Rules but subsequently the pay scales and service conditions prescribed by the All-India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) for the faculty of the Institute were adopted with notional effect from 01.01.1996, as notified on 27.10.2009 and 26.11.2012. On this adoption, the petitioner began drawing pay in accordance with the AICTE pay scale and during her tenure in service was duly placed in the Senior Scale Lecturer position with Academic Grade Pay (AGP) of Rs. 7000/- under the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) w.e.f. 09.01.2003. Thereafter, the petitioner was given further promotion under CAS to Lecturer (Selection Grade) in the pay band of Rs. 15,600-39,100/- with AGP of Rs. 8000/- w.e.f. 09.01.2008.

2. The petitioner’s grievance has arisen from the denial to her claim for subsequent promotion to the Higher Grade of Lecturer (Selection Grade) in Pay Band 4 i.e. Rs. 37,400-67,000/- with AGP of Rs. 9000/- which normally would become due upon completion of 3(three) years’ service in AGP Rs. 8000/- grade. The denial of her promotion as contained in the impugned notification dated 16.01.2024, was on the sole ground of her lack of a PhD which as per the respondents was mandatory by application of AICTE Regulations of 2010. The petitioner then assailed this interpretation as being erroneous and contrary to the express provisions of the relevant AICTE Regulations and made representations to this effect, which were however, rejected by the respondents while reaffirming their position vide a communication dated 01.04.2024 and 18.06.2025. The petitioner is therefore, before this Court by way of the instant writ application alleging arbitrariness on the part of the respondents, and has prayed for appropriate directions and reliefs.

3. Mr. S. Sen, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the respondents have fundamentally misconstrued the applicable AICTE Regulations, inasmuch as, the mandatory requirement of possessing a PhD for promotion to AGP Rs. 9000/- grade as introduced in the 2010 and 2012