IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JANUARY 2008 / 26TH POUSHA 1929 OP.No. 36112 of 2002(Y) ----------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. E.P. MATHEW, ST. STEPHEN'S COLLEGE, UZHAVOOR. 2. P.K. RADHAKRISHNA PANICKER, D.B. PAMPA COLLEGE, PARUMALA. 3. K. MATHEW, BASELIOUS COLLEGE, KOTTAYAM. 4. JOY MARKOSE, DO. DO. 5. N. SIVASANKARAN KARATHA, S.S.V.COLLEGE, VALAYANCHIRANGARA. 6. K.A. CYRIAC, ST. STEPHEN'S COLLEGE, UZHAVOOR. 7. JOSE VARGHESE, DO. DO. 8. DR. C.V. THOMAS, DO. DO. 9. K.L. THOMAS, DO. DO. 10. VINODAMMA M. ABRAHAM. DO. DO. 11. PRASAD PAUL, DO. DO. 12. THOMAS M. PAIMPALLIL, DO. DO. 13. P.J. JOY, DO. DO. 14. JAMES KURIAN, DO. DO. 15. JOHN ZACHARIA, DO. DO. 16. PHILIP CHACKO, DO. DO. 17. ALEYAMMA KURIAN, DO. DO. 18. SUSAN VARGHESE, C.M.S. COLLEGE, KOTTAYAM. 19. T.T.THOMAS, ST. STEPHEN'S COLLEGE, UZHAVOOR. 20. BABU THOMAS, DO. DO. 21. P.M. ABDUL WAHAB, GOVERNMENT COLLEGE, NATTAKOM. 22. ANTONY MATHEW, S.B. COLLEGE, CHANGANACHERRY. 23. THOMAS ANTONY, DO. DO. 24. DR. SHAJU THOMAS, NIRMALA COLLEGE, MOOVATUPUZHA. 25. SUNNY JOSEPH, DO. DO. 26. P.K. NARAYANA SARMA, S.S.V. COLLEGE, VALANYANCHIRANGARA. 27. M.V. NARAYANAN NAMBOOTHIRI, DO. DO. 28. P.R. RAGHAVAN, DO. DO. 29. SHAJI SEBASTIAN, ST. STEPHEN'S COLLEGE, UZHAVOOR. 30. RAJALAKSHMI. R., N.S.S. HINDU COLLEGE, CHANGANACHERRY. 31. K. RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR, DO.DO. 32. T.D. MATHEW, BHARATHAMATHA COLLEGE, THRIKKAKKARA. 33. T.R. VENKATESH, DO. DO. 34. V.K. VARGHESE, DO. DO. 35. K.J. JOSEPH, DO. DO. 36. MATHEW JACOB, DO. DO. 37. ALICE AMPANAT. M., DO. DO. 38. JOSE V.A., DO. DO. 39. THOMAS V.T., DO. DO. 40. DR. JOY JOSEPH PUTHUSSERRY, DO. DO. 41. DR. RITTY JOSEPH, DO. DO. 42. EUGENE GERTRUDE, DO. DO. 43. JOY JOSEPH, DO. DO. 44. P.V. BABU, DO. DO. 45. BABUJI M., B.A.M. COLLEGE, THURUTHIKKADU. 46. ABRAHAM GEORGE, DO. DO. 47. DR. K.K. KURIAKOSE, BASELIOUS COLLEGE, KOTTAYAM. 48. P.M. JAMES, DO. DO. 49. K.V. GEORGE, BASELIUS COLLEGE, KOTTAYAM. 50. K.S. ULLAS, DO. DO. 51. NEENAMMA JOHN, DO. DO. 52. N.J. JAMES,NEWMAN COLLEGE, THODUPUZHA. 53. DOLLY JOSEPH, DO. DO. 54. ROSALIN FRANCIS, DO. DO. 55. M.T. JOHN, DO. DO. 56. K.J. CELIN, DO. DO. 57. M.C. THOMAS, DO. DO. 58. K.M. MATHEW, DO. DO. 59. PHILOMINA DOMIC, DO. DO. 60. PHILOMINAMMA GEORGE, DO. DO. 61. R. KRISHNA PILLAI, DO. DO. 62. K.S. TOMY, DO. DO. 63. JESSY MATHEW, DO. DO. 64. MARYKUTTY THOMAS, DO. DO. 65. DR. V.K. NARAYANA KAIMAL, D.B. COLLEGE, THALAYOLAPARAMBU. 66. P.K. JOY, DEVAMATHA COLLEGE, KURAVILANGAD. 67. CYRIAC SEBASTIAN, DO. DO. 68. JAMES PHILIP, DO. DO. 69. KURIAN ISSAC V., DO. DO. 70. LIZZY JOHN, DO. DO. 71. V.M. THOMAS, DO. DO. 72. A.V. THOMAS, CATHOLICATE COLLEGE, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. SRI.SABU GEORGE SRI.SAIGI JACOB PALATTY RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT, DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COLLISSION, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG, NEW DELHI-110 002. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS KOSHY, ADDL.CGSC GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T.T. MAHAMOOD SRI.JOHN VARGHESE, SCGSC SRI.PRAKASH PUTHIADAM, ADDL.CGSC SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR SRI.GEORGE JOSEPH, ADDL.CGSC SRI.SUNNY XAVIER, ACGSC THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 8/01/2008, ALONG WITH COC NO. 451 OF 2006 & WPC NO. 3123 OF 2004, THE COURT ON 16/1/2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: O.P.NO. 36112/2002 ------------------------------------ EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT. 17-6-1987. EXT.P2 REVISED GOVT. ORDER DT. 22-7-1988. EXT.P3 SCHEME AS ACCEPTED AND NOTIFIED BY THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.P4 RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE U.G.C. EXT.P5 LETTER DT. 27-7-1998. EXT.P6 LETTER DT. 27-7-1998. EXT.P7 LETTER DT. 5-9-1998 EXT.P8 ORDER DT. 6-11-1998. EXT.P9 MINITUES OF MEETING DT. 6-10-1999. EXT.P10 GOVT. ORDER DT. 21-12-1999. EXT.P11 LETTER DT. 31-3-2000. EXT.P12 CLARIFICATION DT. 24-3-1999. EXT.P13 TRUE COPY OF TYPED FORM. EXT.P14 STARRED QUESTION AND ANSWER DT. 17-6-2000. EXT.P15 REPRESENTATION DT. 5-12-2001. EXT.P16 LETTER DT. 15-3-2002. EXT.P17 LETTER DT. 2-5-2002. EXT.P18 LETTER DT. 28-12-2004. EXT.P19 LETTER DT. 3-11-2003. EXT.P24 LETTER DT. 7-2-2005. EXT.P24(a) ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P24. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: -------------------------------------- EXT.R1(a) ORDER DT. 27-7-1998. EXT.R1(b) LETTER DT. 27-7-1998. EXT.R1(c) LETTER DT. 6-11-1998. EXT.R1(d) LETTER DT. 17-5-2006. EXT.R1(e) LETTER DT. 9-2-2007. EXT.R3(a) NOTIFICATION DT. 27-7-1998. EXT.R3(b) NOTIFICATION DT. 6-11-1998. EXT.R3(c) LETTER DT. 24-3-1999. EXT.R3(d) JUDGMENT IN W.A.NO. 1044-2005. EXT.R3(e) LETTER DT. 29-6-2004. EXT.R3(f) ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.R1(e) [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= O.P. No. 36112 of 2002, W. P (C) No. 3123 of 2004 & Cont. Case (Civil) No. 451 of 2006 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 16th January, 2008. J U D G M E N T Both O.P. No. 36112/2002 and W.P(C) No. 3123/2004 raise the same issue and the contempt case has been filed for non-compliance with interim order dated 20-12-2005 in O.P.No. 36112/2002. In both petitions, the petitioners, who are college lecturers in the State of Kerala, seek redressal of their grievances in respect of an anomaly in the matter of their placement under the UGC Scheme and the Career Advancement Programme formulated by the University Grants Commission and implemented in all the States including the State of Kerala. The fact that it is an anomaly is not disputed before me by any of the respondents. In view of the said fact, I had passed an interim order dated 20-12-2005 in O.P.No. 36112 of 2002 as follows: “This original petition is filed by a group of 72 unfortunate College lecturers who moved into Lecturer, Selection Grade between 1-1-1996 and 27-7-1998 under the University Grants Commission Scheme. As a result of the same, they were denied the benefit of placement in the pay scale of Rs.14,940/- which was only granted to those lecturers who moved into Selection Grade on or before 1-1-1996 and also were denied the benefit of career advancement which was granted only with effect from 27-7-1998. As a result of this, for reaching the stage of Rs. 14,940/- in the pay scale of Rs. 12000-420-18300 for the petitioners, it would take 23 years whereas for the senior who moved into Selection Grade on or before 10101996, it took only 21 years and those who were juniors to the petitioners, it took only 18 years. According to the petitioners, this anomaly arose on account of the injudicious implementation of the scheme for placement in the scale of pay and for career advancement. The fact that this was an anomaly which required to be corrected, has been accepted by the Central Government as is evident from Ext. P7 minutes of the discussion between the Union Minister of Human Resources Development and the Union of Employees of University Teachers. This anomaly was recognised by the State Government as is clear from Ext. P11 O.P. No. 36112/02 etc. -: 2 :- minutes of the meeting held by the Minister of Education with the representatives of the recognised Teachers' Organisation of the College teachers. This question was raised in the Parliament also wherein on 5-5-2000, in answer to the question by a member of Parliament Sri. J. Chitaranjan, the Minister for Human Resources Development gave the following answer as is evident by Ext. P14: “(a) The Government have advised State Governments to implement the Career Advancement Scheme (SCA) for University and College Teacher's w.e.f.27.7.98 i.e. from the date of notification of the Scheme of revision of pay scales by the Ministry. The question of implementation of CAS w.e.f. 1.1.1996 has been considered in consultation with UGC and representatives of Teachers' Federations. The proposal in this behalf will be submitted to the Cabinet for consideration and approval soon.” Again in Ext. P17, the University Grants Commission has informed the General Secretary of the All India Federation of University and College Teachers' Organisations as follows: “With reference to your letter dated 15-3-2002 on the above cited subjects, I am directed to say that the matter regarding of benefit at Rs.14,940/- to teachers is under consideration of the Ministry of Human Resources Development. As far as the issue regarding attendance of refresher courses is concerned, it is informed that there is no provision for exemption from such courses. The UGC had been extending the last date for participation in such courses, the last being 31-12-2000. As such all teachers are required to attend the requisite number of refresher curses.” 2. This problem appears to be one confronting every State in India. In fact, the Government of Uttar Pradesh had taken positive steps to rectify this anomaly and by Ext. P18, with the concurrence of the University Grants Commission, the said State had implemented the career advancement scheme with effect from 1-1-1996 instead of 27-7-1998. It would be advantageous here to quote the English translation provided by the petitioner of the communication Ext. Ext.P18 from the Government of Uttar Pradesh to the Director of Higher Education, Uttar Pradesh and Vice Chancellors of all State Universities of Utter Pradesh. It reads thus: “1. I am by direction to inform you that in connection with the review of pay of teachers in the Universities and colleges of UP vide Government Order. 390/70-2-99-16(45)/98-1-3(III), dated 16-2-99 it has been mentioned that those the learned Single Judge Lecturers/Readers who were in the earlier pay scale of 3700-5000 prior to 1-1-1996 and who complete five years of service as the learned Single Judge Lecturers/Readers would be fixed at Rs.14940 in the scale of 12000-420-18300. 2. Keeping that fact in view, the Teachers Organisations have O.P. No. 36112/02 etc. -: 3 :- drawn the attention of the Government to the fact that their Career Advancement Scheme was implemented only from 27-7- 98. Therefore, those teachers who had become the learned Single Judge Lecturers/Readers between 1-1-96 and 27-7-98 should be fixed at Rs.14940 in the scale of 12000-420-18300 as and when they complete five years of service as the learned Single Judge Lecturers/Readers. 3. After due deliberations, it has been decided that the pay of all those who became the learned Single Judge Lecturers/Readers between 1-1-1998 and 27-7-98 and who complete five years of service be fixed at Rs.14940 in the scale of 12000-420-18300. It has been decided to issue this order which is subject to the conditions stipulated in the HRD Ministry's letter F-1-22/97-U-I, dated 27-7-98. As a result of implementation of this order, 80% of the excess expenditure incurred will be borne by the Central Government as per UGC's letter dated 29-6-2004. 4. In this connection, the earlier order No. 390/70/2-99-16(45)/ 98, dated 16-2-99 and the Government Order No.3877/70-2-99- 16(45)-98 dated 1-12-1999 stand revised. 5. This order is issued with the concurrence of the Finance Department Order No. U.O.E.11-2316/X-04 dated 27-12-2004. 6. Kindly place this order in the proper forum of the Universities so that it is implemented within three weeks.” 3. It is evident from the exhibits produced in this case that the State of Kerala could not emulate the State of Utttar Pradesh because of lack of positive response from the Central Government and the University Grants Commission without concurrence from whom the State Government cannot implement the proposal in the same manner as the State of Uttar Pradesh has done. In view of the fact that the University Grants Commission had granted concurrence for such action by the State of Uttar Pradesh would go to show that the entire issue could have been solved if the State Government, Central Government and the University Grants Commission had taken a positive approach in the matter by applying their mind to the issue. In the above circumstances, I pass the following orders: 1. The 2nd respondent-Secretary, Higher Education Department, Government of Kerala shall immediately within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, take up the matter with the 1st respondent- Secretary, Ministry of Human Resource Development, Department of Education, Government of India and the 3rd respondent-University Grants Commission putting forward the proposal for advancing the date of implementation of the Career Advancement Scheme of the College teachers from 27-7-1998 to 1-1-1996. O.P. No. 36112/02 etc. -: 4 :- 2. The Central Government and University Grants commission shall, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of the proposal from the 2nd respondent, apply their mind and pass appropriate orders thereon taking into consideration Exts. P7 and P17 as also the fact that in respect of College teachers of Uttar Pradesh, concurrence has been granted for a similar proposal as evidenced by Ext. P18. The registry shall forward one copy each of this order directly to each of the three respondents for compliance. Also hand over copies of this order to the learned Government Pleader and learned Assistant Solicitor General for ensuring compliance.” 2. Even under threat of action under the contempt of courts, the Central Government and the University Grants Commission have not done anything in the matter even after two long years. After admitting that there is an anomaly in the matter, there is no justification for respondents 1 and 3 for not taking appropriate action to rectify the same. Therefore, it became necessary to dispose of the original petition itself. 3. Accordingly, I took up the original petition and writ petition themselves for hearing. In the course of hearing, I directed the University Grants Commission to categorically state as to whether they have accorded sanction to the Government of Uttar Pradesh to grant similar benefits, which are sought by the petitioners, to lecturers of the State of Uttar Pradesh. Again, neither the Government of India nor the University Grants Commission has come up with a definite answer as to whether they have granted permission to the State of Uttar Pradesh for the action taken by the in Ext. P18, except giving some evasive answers. Therefore, by order dated 20-7- 2007, I directed the University Grants Commission to produce the letter dated 29-6-2004 referred to in Ext. P18. They have produced the same as Ext. R3(e), which is in Hindi along with an English translation thereof as Ext. R3(f), which reads thus: “In relation your Letter No. 404/70-2/2004-16(45)/98 T.C, dated 3/2/2004, I have been directed to inform you that up to O.P. No. 36112/02 etc. -: 5 :- 80% of the increment will be borne by the Central Government and the rest 20% will be borne by the State Government. In this context Letter No. F1 – 22/97-U dated 27/7/1998 from the Human Resources Ministry is being faxed to you.” This, at least, would show that the UGC and the Government of India had also given its stamp of approval for the action taken by the State of U.P. and agreed to bear 80% of the additional expenditure in this regard. Ext. P 24(a) would further show that in implementation of the rectification of the anomaly, the basic pay of similarly placed lecturers has been appropriately revised by the State of U.P. 4. In view of the above proven facts, it is clear that the Union of India and the UGC have approved the action of the State of U.P. in the matter of rectifying the anomaly in respect of lecturers of U.P. similarly placed like the petitioners in the writ petition. As such, denying the very same benefit to the petitioners would amount to arbitrariness, unreasonableness, discrimination and violation of the fundamental rights of the petitioners. 5. In the above circumstances, the respondents are liable to be directed to take and complete all steps to see that the anomaly is rectified in the case of the petitioners also. It is admitted by the 1st respondent that appropriate proposal has been forwarded by the 2nd respondent-Government of Kerala to the other respondents. In the above circumstances, I direct respondents 1 and 3 to approve the proposal forwarded by the 2nd respondent and make available 80% of the fund needed for implementing the same, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On receipt of the same, the 2nd respondent shall pass consequential orders and disburse monetary benefits arising therefrom to the petitioners within a further period of 2 months thereof. The two writ petitions are disposed of accordingly. 6. I strongly disapprove of the conduct of respondents 1 and 3 O.P. No. 36112/02 etc. -: 6 :- which led to filing of Contempt Case (Civil) No. 451/2006. However, in view of the fact that the Contempt Case is for non-compliance of an interim order in an original petition which itself has been disposed of by this judgment, taking a lenient view, I am closing the said Contempt Case. Ordered accordingly. S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/