C.W.P.No.14062 of 2011(O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH C.W.P.No.14062 of 2011(O&M) Date of decision : 06.12.2011 Dr. Vikas Shokeen ....Petitioner Versus State of Haryana and others ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present : Mr. Rajesh Arora, Advocate for the petitioner Ms. Maloo Chahal, DAG, Haryana MAHESH GROVER, J. The prayer of the petitioner in the instant writ petition is that he has not been granted increments in accordance with the instructions which envisaged that a person who is a holder of Ph.D degree at the time of recruitment of Lecturer shall be given benefit of four advance increments. The relevant instructions are as follows:- (i)Four and two advance increments will be admissible to those who had Ph.D and M.Phil degrees, respectively, at the time of recruitment as lecturers, candidates with D.litt/D.Sc. should be given benefit at par with Ph.D and M.Litt. at par with M.Phil. (ii)One increment will be admissible to those teachers with M.Phil who acquire Ph.D within two years of recruitment. (iii)A lecturer with Ph.D will be eligible for two advance increment when she/he moves into selection grade as reader. C.W.P.No.14062 of 2011(O&M) 2 (iv)The benefits of two advance increments in lieu of Ph.D Degree will be admissible to teachers who acquire Ph.D in their service on or after 1.1.96. However, the increments would be admissible from the date of award of the Ph.D degree.” Initially the increments were granted to the petitioner but sanction was not accorded, resulting in denial of revised pay scale to the petitioner but subsequently by virtue of order Annexure P-14 the benefit has been withdrawn on the premise that on the date when the petitioner joined service he was not having a degree of Ph.D to his credit. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends with reference to Annexure P-2 that the Ph.D degree had been conferred upon him on 31.12.2002 whereas the respondents are taking the date of convocation to be the date of acquisition of degree to deny the petitioner the benefit of four increments. On due consideration of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that the respondents have erred in not granting the increments to the petitioner in accordance with the instructions. The petitioner joined service on 16.4.2003 and the doctorate degree had been conferred upon him on 31.12.2002 as is evident from Annexure P-2. On 23.12.2003 i.e after the date of his joining he received the degree by way of convocation and it is this subsequent date which is being taken into consideration by the respondents to deny the benefit of four increments to the petitioner. This in the opinion of this Court is erroneous as the convocation is merely an acknowledgment of the qualification or degree which a person has acquired and a recognition of such an achievement. The acquisition of degree of C.W.P.No.14062 of 2011(O&M) 3 doctorate by the petitioner stood acknowledged by the University in 2002 when the certificate was issued to him as a measure of acknowledgment and therefore on the date when the petitioner was appointed he stood qualified having the requisite degree to his credit. For the aforesaid reasons, the reasoning of the respondents is held to be fallacious and thus the impugned order Annexure P-14 cannot be sustained. It is accordingly set aside. The petition is accepted and the respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for the grant of four increments in accordance with the instructions. Let needful be done preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. Needless to say that all consequential benefits shall also be made available to the petitioner. December 6, 2011 (Mahesh Grover) rekha Judge