IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2009 / 5TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 20043 of 2006(J) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- 1. K.K.BABU, KRISHNA KALLYANI, AISWARYA COLONY, OLAVAKKODE, PALAKKAD-678 002. 2. E.K.KUNHANANDAN NAMBIAR, KRISHNA, SURYA NAGAR, AKATHETHARA, PALAKKAD-678 008. 3. DR.K.B.ANAND, ANAGHA, AISWARYA COLONY, OLAVAKKODE, PALAKKAD-678 002. (PETITIONERS ARE WORKING AS LECTURES AND ASST. PROFFERS' IN N.S.S. COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING IN PALAKKAD. BY MR.U.K.RAMAKRISHNAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE BY ADVS.E.K.MADHAVAN MR.P.V.LOHITHAKSHAN MR.V.KRISHNA MENON SMT.UMA GOPINATH RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, N.S.S. COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING, PALAKKAD-678 008. BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.MUHAMOOD T.T THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.20043/2006 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 22.3.94 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P2:- COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 22.3.94 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P3:- COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DTD. 22.3.1994 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE G.O.(RT) 929/91/H.EDN. DTD. 10.7.91 OF THE IST RESPONDENT. P5:- COPY OF THE SPONSORSHIP CERTIFICATE DTD. 10.7.91 GRANTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P6:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.DP3/16736/00/DTE(2) DTD. 20.6.05 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P7:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 6.7.05 SUBMITTED BY THE IST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P8:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 6.7.05 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P9:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 6.7.05 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P10:- COPY OF THE ORDER NO.DP3/1673/2000(6) DTD. 29.5.06 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P10(a):- COPY OF THE ORDER DP3/16736/2000(1) DTD. 29.5.2006 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P11:- COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER NO.G.O.(MS) 182/84/H.EDN. DTD. 20.7.84 DTD.20.7.1984. P12:- COPY OF THE G.O.(MS) NO.146/04-H.EDN. DTD. 5.11.04. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS COPY OF THE G.O.(P) NO.66/2001/H.EDN. DTD. 18.6.01. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.20043/2006-J ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 27th day of July, 2009 J U D G M E N T All the three petitioners are presently working as Lecturers in senior scale in N.S.S College of Engineering at Palakkad. They have entered service, on 18/11/1983, 14/11/1983 and 17/11/1983 respectively, as Lecturers. 2. In the year 1986, the Government of India had introduced a scheme as All India Council for Technical Education Scheme, for short “AICTE Scheme”, which provided scales of pay and other matters relating to Teachers of Engineering Colleges were governed. This was adopted by the State Government and was implemented with effect from 01/01/1986. 3. Thus, as per the Scheme, cadre promotion and career advancement placements were allowable to Lecturers who had completed 8 years of service according to which they were entitled for senior scale. Similarly, a Lecturer (Senior Scale) who had completed 8 years of service in that post was entitled for placement as Lecturer (Selection Grade). 4. Exts.P1, P2 and P3 are orders by which petitioners were granted Senior Scale. W.P.(C). No.20043/06 -:2:- 5. One of the benefits of the scheme is Quality Improvement Programme (QIP) providing facility for higher education. The petitioners were granted sanction for deputation to undergo M.Tech Course, by various Government Orders. Ext.P4 is the order passed by the Government in respect of the first petitioner. Accordingly, they have acquired M.Tech Degree. In the sponsorship certificates issued to the petitioners, it is clearly stated that the petitioners will be treated as on deputation and their pay and allowances will be protected. Later, the AICTE Scheme was revised in 1996 and as per the revised scheme a Lecturer (Senior Scale)with M.Tech Degree on completion of five years service in that post is entitled to get placement in Lecturer (Selection Grade). This was implemented by the Government with effect form 01/01/1996. According to the petitioners, as they have completed five years as Lecturers (Senior Scale), they are entitled to get placement in Lecturer (Selection Grade). Ext.P6 is the proceedings by which they were granted the said benefit 6. Even though, in Ext.P6, the petitioners were granted the said benefit, the dates of placement in the Senior Scale is seen changed. The modification was made in the light of the fact that the period of deputation under the QIP could not be reckoned for the said purpose. The petitioners W.P.(C). No.20043/06 -:3:- have filed Exts.P7, P8 and P9 representation in the matter. Ext.P10 shows that the representations were rejected. Apart from the same, the petitioners have not been given due increments after they have undergone the short term course prescribed by the AICTE Scheme. The petitioners are relying upon Ext.P11 Government Order to show that the periods spent on deputation is liable to be reckoned for granting all the benefits. Ext.P12 is the order by which the period for participation in Refresher Course was extended upto 31/12/2004 for placement under Career Advancement Scheme. According to the petitioners, they have undertaken short term courses within the said period. 7. The first respondent has filed a counter affidavit in the matter. It is admitted in the counter affidavit that the period for undergoing short term courses were extended upto 31/12/2004. As regards the QIP of AICTE, it is submitted that the petitioners were given placement by reckoning the period of QIP also as qualifying service. But the Scheme does not provide so. The said mistake was found later only when the proposal for next placement as Lecturer (Selection Grade) was made. It is further pointed out that Ext.P11 will not apply as far as the petitioners are concerned. W.P.(C). No.20043/06 -:4:- 8. It is clear from the pleadings that as far as AICTE Scheme 1986 is concerned, there is no enabling provision to reckon the QIP period as qualifying service. Ext.P11 though permits reckoning of the said period, the said order is dated 20/07/1984 and will not obviously apply to the AICTE Scheme. In that view of the matter, the stand adopted by the respondents in Ext.P6 cannot be faulted. 9. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in the revised AICTE Scheme 1996, implemented in 2000 which was effective from 01/01/1996, there was a specific provision to reckon the period of deputation undergone under QIP as qualifying service. It is pointed out that the petitioners alone are discriminated whereas, their juniors were benefited. It is for the petitioners to take up the matter before the AICTE itself and if the petitioners file appropriate representations before the AICTE seeking for such benefit, the same will be considered and appropriate orders will be passed. The AICTE will also ascertain the views of the State Government before any orders as above are passed. 10. Then the other reliefs sought for in the matter is with regard to the sanction of increments. As per Ext.P12 the period of participation in Refresher Courses was extended upto 31/12/2004. In the writ petition, the W.P.(C). No.20043/06 -:5:- petitioners maintain that all of them have undergone the short term courses within the said period. In paragraph (8) of the counter affidavit it is stated that the first and third petitioners have not completed the short term/Refresher Courses within the next normal increment date, from which date the placements were granted. This issue requires a reconsideration. 11. If the petitioners have completed the short term courses within the period provided in Ext.P12, they are entitled for the benefit of sanction of increment. The petitioners will file appropriate representation to the second respondent within a period of one month seeking the said benefit and the second respondent will consider the same and pass appropriate orders after considering Ext.P12 also. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms