IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 26TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 33549 of 2007(R) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. DR.R.LATHIKA BHAI SELECTION GRADE LECTURER IN HINDI RETIRED FROM, S.N.COLLEGE KOLLAM,RESIDING AT MHAN NIVAS, PATTAATHANAM, KOLLAM. 2. DR.N.RAMANUJAN,S/O. DR. P.N.NARAYAN READER IN ZOOLOGY (RETD FROM S.N.COLLEGE KOLLAM RESIDING AT INDUSREE, DEVASWOM LANE A-6, KESAVADASAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV.MR.M.V.THAMBAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. UNIVERSITY GRANT COMMISSION REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG NEW DELH- 110002 R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.V.T.K.MOHANAN R4 BY ADV. MR.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.33549/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF GOVT. ORDER G.O.(P) 171/99/H.EDN. DTD. 21.12.99. P2:- COPY OF THE G.O.(P) 44/2001/H.EDN. DTD. 29.3.01. P3:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 25.8.03 IN WPC. 23870/03. P4:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.F1/UGC/192/03 DT. 31.1.2005. P5:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 20.6.2003 IN OP. NO.32727/01. P6:- COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT LETTER NO.29656/C3/2003/H.EDN. DTD. 23.11.04. P7:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 5.4.2005 IN WPC. 11499/05. P8:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 31.7.06 IN WA. 1444/2005. P9:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 17.3.05 IN WPC. 8374/05. P10:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.11658/D1/D/H.EDN. DTD. 21.5.05. P11:- COPY OF THE GO(MS) NO.48/06/H.EDN. DTD. 13.11.06. P12:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.F1/7519/05 DTD. 2.2.07. P13:- COPY OF THE LETTER NO.F1/UGC/7519/05 DTD. 26.9.07. R3(a):- COPY OF THE G.O.(MS) NO.148/06/H.EDN. DTD. 13.11.06. TRUE COPY P.S.TO JUDGE tss T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 33549 of 2007-R - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of September, 2009. JUDGMENT The petitioners were respectively working as Selection Grade Lecturer in Hindi and Reader in Zoology as on the date of their retirement from service. The first petitioner retired from service on 31.5.1997 and the second petitioner retired from service on 31.3.1997. They are aggrieved by the denial of the benefit of two increments admissible to teachers who have obtained Ph.D. as provided in para 6.18 of Ext.P1 order by which the Government implemented the U.G.C. Scheme. 2. The stand taken by the respondents is that since the petitioners retired from service prior to 27.7.1998, they are not entitled for two advance increments. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the benefit under Ext.P1, viz. the revision of pay was sanctioned with effect from 1.1.1996 and the advance increments also form part of the same and therefore at least the petitioners are entitled for the benefit of revision of pension from 27.7.1998. 3. Learned Standing Counsel appearing for the University Grants Commission submitted that the petitioners are not entitled for the said wpc 33549/2007 2 benefit since the issue itself is covered against them by Ext.P8 judgment of the Division Bench. 4. The petitioners are also relying upon Exts.P3 to P6 to show that other similarly placed persons have been granted the benefit. Ext.P7 is the judgment rendered by this court in a writ petition filed by the first petitioner. Ext.P8 is the judgment in the writ appeal filed against Ext.P7 judgment, wherein this court clarified the position. As per Ext.P10, the second petitioner was informed that he is not entitled for the benefit and this information was passed on in the light of the direction issued in Ext.P9 judgment. 5. A reference can also be made to Ext.P11 order passed by the Government pursuant to Ext.P8 judgment. It is specified in Ext.P11 that college teachers who have acquired Ph.D. degree prior to 1.1.1996 including Readers, Professors and Principals who were not given the benefit of any advance increments as per earlier Career Advancement Scheme are eligible for two advance increments which will be applicable from 27.7.1998. Actually this goes against the interest of the petitioners. But the matter is now practically covered by the directions issued by the Division Bench in Ext.P8 judgment. In para 12, after referring to the letter dated 14.11.2005, it was held thus: wpc 33549/2007 3 “From the above, it can be seen that whatever little doubt one had in the matter of extending the benefit to those who acquired Ph.D. prior to 1.1.1996, and also as to whether such benefits are applicable to Readers, the answer is to be beyond doubt that all teachers including Readers, Professors and Principals who acquired Ph.D. during their service even prior to 1.1.1996 and those who were not given the benefit of advance increment as per the earlier Career Advancement Scheme shall also be given the benefit of two advance increments. So however, the same will be applicable from 27.7.1998. Therefore, whatever be the position as it stood at the time of rendering the judgment by the Division Bench in W.A.No.2235/2004, the same has since been changed by the subsequent issuance of the letter which is produced as Ext.R1(a) in W.A.No.118/2005 by the Government of India. It has to be noticed that the decision of the Division Bench was rendered on 28.3.2005 whereas Ext.R1(a) in W.A.118/2005 was issued on 14.11.2005. Therefore, we are of the firm opinion that in view of the position as clarified in the letter Ext.R1(a) it has to be held that all those who acquired Ph.D. degree during their service period including Readers, Professors and Principals, will be entitled to the advance increments which will be applicable from 27.7.1998.” 6. Therefore, the Bench was of the view that persons who have acquired Ph.D. like the petitioners, will be entitled for the advance increments which will be applicable from 27.7.1998. 7. Even though learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that a wpc 33549/2007 4 distinction has to be drawn in this case and that the petitioners should at least be given the benefit of the revision of pension from 27.7.1998, I cannot accede to the said prayer in the light of the binding directions issued by the Division Bench. As on the cut off date, they were not in service. The benefit of two advance increments are not provided for any persons who have retired from service as on 27.7.1998 or prior to the said date. In that view of the matter, the petitioners cannot, as a matter of right, claim that they are entitled for grant of increments, even though in the case of some other persons that was granted by the Government based on the directions issued by this court in their cases. But now that the matter is settled by the Division Bench as per Ext.P8 judgment which was implemented by the Government as per Ext.P11, the contentions raised by the petitioners cannot be accepted. Therefore, the writ petition fails and it is dismissed. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/