HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD WRIT APPEAL No.821 OF 2003 Between: Kakatiya Institute of Technology and Science, Rep. By its Secretary and correspondent. …. Appellant and V.G.Narayana Rao and others …. Respondents This court made the following: HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE A.GOPAL REDDY AND HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE P.DURGA PRASAD WRIT APPEAL No.821 OF 2003 JUDGMENT: (per Hon’ble Sri Justice A.Gopal Reddy) This writ appeal under clause 15 of the Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the orders of the learned Single Judge in W.P.No.13655 of 1995, dated 27.03.2003, wherein the learned Single Judge allowed the writ petition directing respondent No.2/writ appellant to consider the claim of the writ petitioner for grant of two advance increments as per clause 6.O(d) of the service conditions enumerated by the All India Counsel for Technical Education (AICTE), dated 15.03.2000, within a period of two months from the date of that order. Writ petitioner (hereinafter referred to as “respondent No.2”) while working in the Osmania University was appointed as an Assistant Professor on 02.09.1982 in the Kakatiya University- respondent No.2. While he was working as such, a notification, dated 15.03.1985, was issued by respondent No.2 inviting application for various posts including the post of Professors permitting the in service candidates also to apply for the said post. By order, dated 30.06.1986, the petitioner, who was working as Assistant Professor of Mechanical Engineering is appointed on promotion as Professor of Mechanical Engineer on regular basis by relaxing the qualification of Ph.D. to be acquired by him within a period of five years from the date of joining as Professor. It is not disputed that the minimum qualification for the post of Professor for teaching in the Ph.D. degree course is first class degree at Bachelors or Master’s level in the appropriate branch of Engineering/Technology and ten years experience in Teaching/Industry/Research out of which five years must be at the level of Assistant Professor and/or equivalent. Admittedly, the petitioner is not a Ph.D. holder as on the date he was promoted to the post of Professor on 30.06.1986. He acquired the said qualification and he was awarded Ph.D. on 20.06.1994. The AICTE by its proceedings in F.No.1-65/CD/NEC/98-99, dated 15.03.2000, made recommendations regarding revision of pay scales and service conditions of Teachers and Librarians and Physical Education Personnel of Degree Level Technical Institutions. The provisions of the notification apply to Teachers, Librarians and Physical Education Instructors in all Degree Level Technical Institutions and Colleges, University Faculties/ Departments/Insitutitons, which are covered under the AICTE. Under clause 2.2 of the recommendations, the revised pay scales shall be effective from 01.01.1996 or from such later date as the respective State Government/Unit Administrations may decide. Incentives for higher educational qualifications mainly acquiring Ph.D. has been prescribed under clause 6.O.d, wherein a teacher will be eligible for two advance increments as and when he acquires a Ph.D. degree in his service career. The AICTE by further proceedings, dated 03.05.2000, it was clarified that the revised pay scales shall be effective from 01.01.1996. Other terms and conditions of service shall come into force with effect from the date of notification by the State Governments/UT Administrations. The State Government after taking into consideration the recommendations of the revised pay scales issued through G.O.Ms.No.294, dated 20.12.2008, modifying the conditions issued in G.O.Ms.No.208, Higher Education (UE.II) Department, dated 29.06.1999, expanding the revised UGC Scales of Pay to the teachers personnel in the Universities and Colleges in the State. The amendment reads as under: “5) A teacher who acquired Ph.D., degree during service prior to 01.01.1996 and who was not given the benefit of any advance increments as per the earlier career Advancement scheme, will be eligible for two (2) advance increments. These advance increments will however be payable from 27.07.1998. These advance increments shall not be admissible to teacher who were recruited/promoted to a post for which Ph.D. was an essential qualification.” From the above, it is clear that the grant of two additional increments on acquiring Ph.D. qualification is not automatic The other terms and conditions of service will come into force with effect from the date of notification by the State Government. As per the revised pay scales and service conditions issued by the AICTE, dated 03.05.2000, the service conditions as issued by the State Government in G.O.Ms.No.208, dated 29.06.1999 as amended through G.O.Ms.No.294, stipulates that the grant of advance increments on acquiring Ph.D. shall not be admissible to teachers who were recruited to a post for which Ph.D was an essential qualification. Once the promotion of the petitioner to the post of Professor requires Ph.D. qualification, being an essential qualification, and relaxing the qualification for enabling him to acquire the qualification as per the promoting order, dated 30.06.1996, the petitioner is not entitled to advance increments, as and when he acquires Ph.D. as per the service conditions of the State Government. Since the recommendation of revision of pay scales as circulated by the AICTE in its circulars, dated 15.03.2000 and 03.05.2000, which provides for incentive for higher educational qualifications, will be subject to the terms and conditions of service and shall come into force with effect from the date of notification by the State Government and unless the rules issued by the State Government have been challenged, which are contrary to the revised pay scales issued by the AICTE, the petitioner as a matter of right is not entitled to advance increments. In view of the same, the impugned order passed by the learned Single Judge in allowing the writ petition, is contrary to the service conditions of the State Government and cannot be sustained. The same is, accordingly, set aside and the writ petition stands dismissed. The Writ Appeal is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. _________________ A.GOPAL REDDY, J ___________________ P.DURGA PRASAD, J 22nd November 2010 LMV