Summary
From 1998 a teacher served continuously in Mahatma Gandhi University's self-financing School of Medical Education, as Lecturer and later in higher posts. She then became Assistant Professor in the University's School of Behavioural Sciences. The Syndicate allowed her earlier service to count for Career Advancement Scheme benefits. The Vice-Chancellor revoked that decision because the first post had not been duly sanctioned. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's direction to count the service. Her appointment was made after inviting applications, on a regular pay-scale and on probation, with the approval of the Director and the Vice-Chancellor. Read as a whole, UGC Regulation 10.1, including clause (f), permits such temporary service to be counted.
Issues
- Whether a teacher's service from 03.10.1998 in the University's School of Medical Education, beginning as Lecturer on a temporary post, is to be counted under Regulation 10.1 of the UGC Regulations for benefits under the Career Advancement Scheme.
Provisions considered
- Regulation 10.1, including clause (f), UGC RegulationsRead as a whole, previous regular service counts for CAS, and temporary service of more than one year counts where the incumbent was duly selected and continued in the post without a break. (¶¶ 6.1, 6.2, 6.3)
- Section 10(17), Mahatma Gandhi University Act, 1985The Vice-Chancellor used this power to revoke the Syndicate's grant of CAS benefits; the revocation did not survive. (¶ 2.1)
Held
- The respondent's initial appointment as Lecturer was made after inviting applications from qualified candidates, on a regular pay-scale and on probation, with the approval of the Director of the School and the sanction of the Vice-Chancellor; her probation was declared and she was thereafter appointed Assistant Professor and Associate Professor on regular pay-scales without break. (¶¶ 6, 6.1)
- Regulation 10.1 must be read as a whole; under clause (f), temporary service of more than one year counts where the incumbent was appointed on a selection committee's recommendation and continued without a break; on these facts the respondent's service from 03.10.1998 is to be counted for CAS, and the High Court committed no error. (¶¶ 6.2, 6.3, 7)
Result
Civil Appeal No. 8031 of 2022 against the Kerala High Court's judgment dated 17.02.2021 in Writ Appeal No. 1355 of 2019 dismissed.