WP(C) 6689/2005 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE B.K. SHARMA This writ petition has been filed seeking regularization of serv ices as lecturer entitling the petitioner to get UGC scale of pay. The petitioner was first appointed as lecturer in Economics way back in 1988 (27.6.1988). By Annexure-6 order dated 13.2.1997 issued by the Dire ctor of Higher Education, Assam appointments of the lecturers named in the order were approved provisionally with effect from 11.1.1996 against the existing pos ts subject to the condition that the said lecturers would be entitled to enjoy t he increment benefit in the UGC scale of pay of Rs. 2200-4000/- per month only a fter obtaining M.Phil or Ph.D Degree within 8 years. In the order, the name of t he petitioner also figured showing his date of appointment as on 1.8.1988. By An nexure-8 letter dated 4.8.1997 addressed to the Director of Higher Education, th e college authority submitted a proposal for regularization of the services of t he petitioner as per the earlier existing UGC norms with effect from 11.1.1996. That was followed by Annexure-9 letter dated 28.10.1997 addressed to the Governm ent in the Education (Higher) Department and issued by the Director of Higher Ed ucation, Assam. In the said letter, the prevailing UGC norms and the State Gover nment relaxed norms were indicated. It was pointed out that the earlier UGC norm s continued upto 15.12.1988 and accordingly a request was made to re-examine the cases of lecturers named in the letter, which also included the name of the pet itioner towards regularization of their services in the UGC scale of pay. In oth er words, the request was not to insist upon the pre-condition of obtaining Ph.D and/or M.Phil Degree. By Annexure-10 letter dated 27.9.1999, the Government of Assam in the Education (Higher) Department communicated its decision to regulari ze the services of the incumbents named in the letter, which included the name o f the petitioner as well. As per the said letter, their services had been regula rized as per the prevailing UGC norms, which existed at the time of their joinin g as lecturer. According to the petitioner, only follow up action that was requi red to be taken is the issuance of regularization order by the Director of Highe r Education, but the same having not been done, the petitioner has been deprived of the benefit of such regularization. Learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on the An nexure-13 letter dated 30.5.2000, by which, under similar circumstances the Gove rnment had accorded approval for regularization of services of one Smt. Niva Ran i Das, lecturer in Assamese in the Barpeta Girls Colelge. Pursuant to the said c ommunication, the Director of Higher Education by his Annexure-14 order dated 8. 8.2000 regularized the services of said Smt. Niva Rani Das in the regular UGC sc ale of pay with effect from 25.3.1998. However, no such action having been taken in respect of the petitioner and the efforts made by the petitioner having fail ed, he filed the instant writ petition. In the affidavit-in-opposition filed by the Director of Higher E ducation, only stand taken is that since the petitioner in terms of the earlier requirement of obtaining M.Phil and/or Ph.D Degree has not obtained the said deg ree, he is not entitled to regularization of his services entitling UGC scale of pay. However, the affidavit does not make any reference to the order of regular ization passed by the Government in the Education (Higher) Department referred t o above. In the reply affidavit, while reiterating and reaffirming the st and in the writ petition, the petitioner has once again stated that revised norm s of Ph.D and/or M.Phil Degree is not applicable to his case as he was appointed on 27.6.1988. In paragraph 3 of the reply affidavit, the petitioner has given t he examples of one Sri Abdul Zabbar Ali and also Smt. Niva Rani Das to show that discrimination has been made only in his case. According to the petitioner all the lecturers, who have been similarly recommended for regularization entitling them to get UGC scale of pay have been so regularized making an exception only t o the case of the petitioner. In this connection, the petitioner has furnished m any instances in the reply affidavit indicating the name of the incumbents who h ave been regularized without insisting for M.Phil and/or Ph.D Degree, since they had been appointed prior to the requirement of such qualification. I have heard Mr. LP Sarma, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Mr. SK Das, learned Standing Counsel, Education Department. There is no dispute that the Government has already recommended for regularization of services of the petitioner without insisting on M.Phil and /or Ph.D Degree as the petitioner was appointed prior to such requirement. There is also no dispute that under similarly circumstanced cases, the Director of Hi gher Education has passed appropriate orders of regularization entitling the inc umbents to receive salary in the UGC scale of pay. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of directin g the Director of Higher Education to consider for immediate necessary follow up action towards regularization of services of the petitioner in the UGC scale of pay taking into account the aforesaid facts including the Annexure- 10 letter d ated 27.9.1999 issued by the Government of Assam in the Education (Higher) Depar tment and also for granting all consequential benefits as may be entitled to. Let the entire exercise be carried out as expeditiously as possi ble, preferably within three months from the date of furnishing a certified copy of this order by the petitioner to the Director of Higher Education, Assam. Let the said authority pass a speaking order highlighting all aspects of the matter . Writ petition is disposed of.