CWP-659/97 (1) In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Jaipur Bench, Jaipur O R D E R S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.659/1997 P.K. Mehta Vs. Engineering College Society, Kota Date Of Order :: 21/12/2010 Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi Mr. R.C. Joshi, for petitioner. Mr. Bharat Vyas, for respondent. Instant petition has been filed by the petitioner with the grievance that services which he rendered as Lecturer in College of Technology & Agricultural Engineering, Udaipur and Government College, Nathdwara on urgent temporary basis after selection may be reckoned for the purpose of grant of senior scale under the scheme framed by University Grant Commission and accepted by the State Government. The petitioner was initially appointed on the recommendation of the selection committee and approval of Vice Chancellor on temporary basis as Lecturer (Mathematics) in the College of Technology and Agricultural Engineering Udaipur vide order dt.22.08.1978 (Exhibit-3) and lateron vide order dt.24.11.1982 (Exhibit-6) was appointed as Lecturer u/r.27 of Rajasthan Education (Collegiate Branch) Service Rules, 1971 on urgent temporary basis and thereafter appointed in Engineering College, Kota after CWP-659/97 (2) selection vide order dt.09.08.1983 (Exhibit- 7A) pursuant to which he joined on 25.08.1983. It will be relevant to observe that from 24.08.1978 to 06.12.1982 the petitioner worked as Lecturer in Udaipur University and in the forenoon of 06.12.1982 he joined Government College, Nathdwara pursuant to order of his appointment dt.24.11.1982 and worked there upto 24.08.1983 and finally pursuant to order issued from the office of Engineering College, Kota he joined on 25.08.1983 and he is presently working as Lecturer in Government College, Kota. The respondent under the scheme issued by the University Grants Commission on completion of five years experience of university teaching granted him benefit of senior selection scale w.e.f. 25.08.1988 vide order dt.26.02.1992 (Exhibit-9) however past service which he rendered as Lecturer was not reckoned by the respondent for grant of benefit of senior scale despite numerous representations being submitted by him and the petitioner finally approached this Court by filing instant petition. The grievance of the petitioner is that without there being any break in service and he had teaching experience of Technology Agriculture College, Udaipur/Government College, Nathdwara, in continuance of which he CWP-659/97 (3) was appointed as Lecturer in College, Kota after his regular selection, the respondent cannot be held to be justified in not reckoning the service experience rendered by the petitioner for the purpose of grant of senior scale under the scheme issued by the University Grants Commission and accepted by the Government. Counsel further submits that Shri Avdhesh Bhardwaj who too was appointed as Lecturer prior to his joining at Kota rendered service in MREC, benefit of his past service rendered was reckoned by the respondent for the purpose of grant of benefit of senior scale under the scheme framed by the University Grants Commission and such discrimination in the case of the petitioner is in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. Reply to the writ petition has been filed by the respondent and it has been averred that the petitioner was granted senior scale under the scheme framed by the University Grants Commission on the basis of the service which he rendered in College, Kota and the service which he rendered prior thereto is not required to be reckoned for the purpose of grant of senior scale under the scheme of University Grants Commission. It has been further urged by counsel for respondent CWP-659/97 (4) that during the service which he rendered prior to his joining at Kota there was a break in service and on account of discontinuance of service rendered by the petitioner still he is not entitled to claim the benefit for the service which he rendered prior thereto for the purpose of grant of senior scale and under these circumstances petitioner is not entitled to claim the relief prayed for and no error has been committed in giving him the benefit of senior scale pursuant to order dt.26.02.1992 (Exhibit-9). I have heard the counsel for parties and gone through the material available on record. The scheme framed by the University Grants Commission which was accepted by the Government clearly postulates for grant of senior scale on completion of eight years of service after regular appointment as provided in para 11 & 12 of the scheme, which reads as under:- “11. In order to encourage research, in continuation of post-graduate studies who, at the time of their recruitment as Lecturers possess Master's and Doctoral degree in engineering/technology shall be granted 2 and 4 advance increments respectively and CWP-659/97 (5) candidates who possess M-Phil and Ph.D degrees in Science and Humanities shall be granted 1 and 3 advance increments respectively in the scale of Rs.2200-4000 alongwith the benefit of corresponding years of service for the purpose of promotion. The existing Lecturers who do not possess these qualifications, or who might be recruited in future without these qualifications or who might be recruited in future without these qualifications, will be eligible for a similar benefit in service for the purpose of promotion as and when they acquire these qualifications, but they will not be eligible for advance increments. Existing Lecturers who possess these qualifications will also be eligible for the benefit in service for the purpose of promotion. 12. Every Lecturer will be placed in a senior scale of Rs.3000-5000 if he has - completed 8 years of service after regular appointment with relaxation in service as provided in para 11 above. - participated in two refresher courses of summer institutes each of approximately four weeks duration or in other comparable CWP-659/97 (6) continuing education programmes approved by the All India Council for Technical Education; and - consistently satisfactory performance appraisal reports.” Apex Court in the judgment in Sharadendu Bhushan Vs. Nagpur University, Nagpur (AIR 1988 Supreme Court 335) had occasion to examine the scheme introduced by the University Grants Commission and it has been observed that experience of university teaching upto degree classes for a period of five years has to be reckoned for grant of senior scale and if incumbent has gained teaching experience as Lecturer of university of more than five years of degree classes that makes him entitled for grant of senior scale under the scheme framed by the university Grant Commission. The relevant observation made by the Apex Court are as under :- “The denial to the appellant, a lecturer in College affiliated to Nagpur University, the benefit of the grade of the Lecturer (Senior scale) under the scheme framed by the University Grants Commission and accepted by the Central Government by not taking into account his experience of University teaching in colleges CWP-659/97 (7) affiliated to the Calcutta University is improper. While framing the criteria for the placement in senior scale, the University itself in the circular used the words “Experience of University teaching up to the degree classes for a period of five years”. They cannot mean that the length of service within the University was the basis. The emphasis in the circular is on the experience gained by the Teacher while in the employment of a University and not on the continuity of the service. Decision of Bombay High Court, reversed.” In the instant case, it has been informed that Ph.D. holders with five years after regular appointment make them eligible for grant of senior scale under the UGC scheme-EX.25 and the petitioner is a Ph.D. holder in regular service and holding teaching experience as a Lecturer continuously since 24.08.1978. Taking note of the eligibility provided under the scheme of UGC in the opinion of this Court that makes the petitioner entitled to get the benefit of service which he had rendered of university teaching from the date of his initial appointment dt.24.08.1978 for the purpose of CWP-659/97 (8) grant of senior scale under the scheme framed by the University Grants Commission of which reference has been made supra. It will be relevant to observe that regular appointment has not been defined under the scheme framed by UGC and the order of appointment pursuant to which the petitioner joined as Lecturer at Udaipur/Nathdwara were also after regular selection in conformity with Article 14 of the Constitution. Taking note thereof the service/experience gained by the petitioner could not have been obliterated by the respondent for the purpose of grant of senior scale under the scheme. So far as the submission made by the counsel for the respondent that service rendered prior to his joining at college kota cannot be reckoned for the purpose of senior scale is without substance for the reason that the teaching experience gained by the petitioner after regular appointment makes him eligible for grant of benefit of senior scale which the petitioner is indeed entitled for. At the same time the further submission made that there was a break in service as such is not entitled to claim senior selection also does not find corroboration from the material on record and the certificate which the respondent has CWP-659/97 (9) placed on record as Annx.R1 dt.15.06.1983 a further certificate (office order) dt.24.08.1983 has been placed on record which shows that the petitioner resigned from service from Government College on 24.08.1983 with his acceptance he was relieved and joined at kota on 25.08.1983 and the certificate dt.15.06.1983 appears to has been issued to him during the period there was a summer vacation. Taking note thereof, the petitioner was continuously in service from the date he initially joined service at Udaipur on 24.08.1978. Consequently, the writ petition succeeds and is hereby allowed and it is held that the petitioner is entitled for grant of senior scale taking note of service which he rendered w.e.f. 24.08.1978 with all consequential benefits. Respondents are also directed to ensure compliance of the judgment within three months. No order as to costs. (Ajay Rastogi),J. VS Shekhawat/-p.9 659cw97Dec21FnlDsps.doc