IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2010 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 29490 of 2005(I) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------- DR.K. KRISHNAN NAMPOOTHIRI, AGED 49, S/O. LATE KRISHNAN NAMPOOTHIRI, READER, SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI-22. BY ADV. SRI.P.CHANDRASEKHAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR, KOCHI-22. 2. THE REGISTRAR, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI-22. R1 & 2 BY ADVS. SRI.SUNIL CYRIAC, SC, KWA SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI,SC,COCHI U THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: svs/ S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.29490 of 2005 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 1st day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner entered service of the Cochin University of Science and Technology as a Lecturer in the School of Management Studies on 05.07.1989. The University adopted the U.G.C. Scheme with effect from 01.01.1986 by order dated 1990. The existing teachers were given option either to join the U.G.C. Scheme or to remain under the existing scheme. The petitioner opted for the U.G.C. Scheme. Accordingly the petitioner was inducted into the U.G.C. scale of pay. He was promoted as Lecturer (Senior Scale) and later as a Reader on 01.01.1994. In respect of persons who have not opted for U.G.C. Scheme there was a separate scheme for promotion called Norms Promotion Scheme. By Ext.P1 order dated 05.09.1997, the University ordered that, all teachers of the University be deemed to be eligible for norms promotion as Readers and subsequently as Professors with effect from the date on which they W.P.(C)No.29490 of 2005 -2- qualified for the same and they were directed to be placed in the U.G.C. Scheme. This order was in violation of the norms of the U.G.C. Scheme. This was pointed out by the audit wing by Ext.P2 audit report. Despite the audit report, by Ext.P3 order dated 19.08.2000, the University decided to implement Ext.P1 subject to final approval of the Government of Kerala. In the meanwhile, in respect of seniority viz-a-viz some persons who were given the benefit of Ext.P1, the petitioner filed Ext.P4 representation. He also filed O.P. No.14555/2001 in respect thereof. While so, the Government directed to review all promotions made in violation of the U.G.C. Scheme. By Ext.P5 order dated 25.09.2003, the University decided to act in accordance with the Government directions. By Ext.P6 dated 25.09.2003 the University decided to constitute a task force for studying the issue. By Ext.P7, the University decided to revoke Ext.P1 and another University order in respect thereof with retrospective effect. By Ext.P8 judgment, O.P. No.14555/2001 was disposed of directing consideration W.P.(C)No.29490 of 2005 -3- of Ext.P4 representation filed by the petitioner. Since it was not done, the petitioner filed Contempt Case (C) No.569/2005. While so, the University passed Ext.P9 order wherein it was stated that, the Syndicate has in its meeting held on 23.06.2004 resolved to maintain the status quo in the matter of all orders hitherto issued by the University granting norms promotion to teachers until the matter is reviewed and therefore the complaint of the petitioner regarding seniority viz-a-viz Dr. P.R. Wilson cannot now be considered. In view of that order, the contempt case was closed with liberty to the petitioner to challenge Ext.P9 order. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “(i) Call for the records leading to Exhibit-P9 and quash the same; (ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing the 2nd Respondent to place Exhibit-P4 petition before the syndicate of the 1st Respondent, without delay forthwith; (iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ order of direction directing the syndicate of the 1st Respondent to consider and take decision on Exhibit-P4 petition of the petitioner without any delay forthwith in the light of Exhibits -P5 to P6 orders and the Government letter No.9845/B2/2000 H.Edn. dated 10-3-2003;” W.P.(C)No.29490 of 2005 -4- 2. No counter affidavit has been filed by the University in this matter. I am surprised that, inspite of violation of U.G.C norms having been brought to the notice of the University by the audit wing as well as the Government, nothing so far has been done by the University in the matter. I am also surprised that, after having adopted the U.G.C Scheme, the University has not chosen to stick to the U.G.C norms and instead given undue benefits to others who have not opted for the U.G.C. Scheme giving them the very same benefits as given to those who had opted for the U.G.C scheme. I am of opinion that, it was against the interest of the University itself to have done so by bringing in unqualified persons within the U.G.C. Scheme to give them benefits on par with those who have opted for the U.G.C scheme affecting the seniority of the persons who had opted for the U.G.C. Scheme. I am of opinion that, such action is unbecoming of a University who should be more interested in the preservation of the standards of education in the State. W.P.(C)No.29490 of 2005 -5- 3. Of course, the standing counsel for the University would submit that, some decisions have been taken in respect thereof. The details of those decisions are not before me. Nothing has been brought on record. That adds to the callous way in which the University has dealt with the matter. A University has sat on the issue for seven long years, which is inexcusable. I do not think that, the University can protract the matter any further. Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The Syndicate of the University shall pass appropriate orders in accordance with Exts.P5, P6 & P7 as expeditiously as possible, in its next meeting. To enable the Syndicate to do so, the entire matter including Ext.P4 shall be placed before the Syndicate by the Registrar of the University in its next meeting. The Syndicate shall take a final decision in the matter in that meeting and implement the same within a further period of one month therefrom. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE shg/