Kusum Chauhan Vs State of Hp and Ors.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA

CWP No.576 of 2024 Date of decision: 10.12.2024

Kusum Chauhan.	Versus		...Pet	itioner.
State of H.P. & Ors.		..	.Respo	ndents.
Coram:
Ms. Justice Jyotsna Whether approved for For the petitioner	Rewal Dua, Judge. reporting? : Mr. Dilip	Sha	rma,	Senior
	Advocate, wi Sharma, Advo	th cate	Mr. .	Manish
For the respondent	: Mr. Sikander	Bhu	shan,	Deputy
	Advocate respondent No	Ge .1.	neral,	for
	: Mr. Devend	er	K.	Sharma,
	Advocate, for & 3.	res	ponden	ts No.2

¶4

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge

¶5

Petitioner in essence is seeking direction to the respondents to count past services rendered by her on Self Financing Scheme for the purpose of grant of benefit of Stage-2 (Rs.15600-39100 + 7000 AGP) and Stage-3 (Rs.1560-39100 + 8000 AGP) to the post of Assistant Professor in the pay-scale of Rs.15600-39100 + 6000 AGP and for promotion as Associate Professor under Career Advancement Scheme (Rs.37400-67000 + 9000 AGP) w.e.f

¶6

1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes

¶7

-2-

¶8

29.06.2019 under the University Grants Commission Regulations 2010 with consequential benefits.

¶9

2(i) It is an admitted position that the petitioner was appointed as Lecturer (Law), subsequently, re-designated as Assistant Professors (Law) in the School of Legal Studies, Shimla on contract basis under Self Financing Scheme on 29.06.2007. She was regularized as Assistant Professor (Law) in University of School of Legal Studies under Self Financing Scheme in the pay-scale of Rs.15600-39100 + 6000 AGP, w.e.f. 01.04.2014. Petitioner was merged in the main stream of respondent-University on 27.02.2020, w.e.f. 30.12.2019.

¶10

2(ii). One Dr. Abha Chauhan Khimta was also appointed as Assistant Professor (Political Science) in University Institute of Legal Studies, Shimla on the same terms and conditions. She was later merged in the respondent-University in the Department of Political Science in the year 2016.

¶11

2(ii)(a) Dr. Abha Chauhan Khimta instituted CWP No.177/2024, seeking directions to the respondentUniversity; i) To fix her pay in the pay-scale of Rs.37600-

¶12

-3-

¶13

67000 + 9000 AGP as payable to an Associate Professor from the date of her promotion as such i.e. 29.03.2020 with all consequential benefits; ii) The services rendered by her at the University Institute of Legal Studies under the Self Financing Scheme as an Assistant Professor be declared to be valid and qualifying service for the benefit of promotion to the post of Associate Professor under Assured Career Advancement Scheme; iii) The University be directed to count the services rendered by her from her initial date of appointment i.e. 29.06.2007 under Self Financing Scheme for conferment of all service related benefits such as fixation of pay, promotion, seniority, pension or any other consequential benefits.

¶14

2(ii)(b) The writ petition preferred by Dr. Abha Chauhan Khimta came for up consideration before a Coordinate Bench of this Court on 01.08.2024. Contention raised on behalf of learned counsel for the petitioner (therein) was that the issue as to whether the past service of an incumbent similarly situated as Dr. Abha Chauhan Khimta was to be counted for the purpose as prayed for by the petitioner (therein) was no longer re-integra. That this issue had been decided in Dr.

¶15

-4-

¶16

Sapna Kumari Vs. H.P. University through its Registrar¹ .

¶17

That the petitioner (therein) was similarly situated, accordingly, decision rendered in Sapna Kumari’s case¹ was also required to be implemented in case of Dr. Abha Chauhan Khimta for counting entire contractual service rendered by her for the purpose of grant of Assured Career Advancement Scheme along with all consequential benefits. Learned counsel for the respondent-University opposed the prayer made on behalf of Dr. Abha Chauhan Khimta.

¶18

2(ii)(c) Dr. Abha Chauhan Khimta Vs. State of H.P. &

¶19

Ors.² was decided on 01.08.2024. It was held that Dr. Abha Chauhan Khimta was similarly situated as Sapna Kumari i.e. the petitioner in CWP No.10156/2023. That this fact had not been disputed by learned counsel for the respondentUniversity. Accordingly, it was held that the case of the petitioner-Dr. Abha Chauhan Khimta was covered under the decision rendered in Sapna Kumari’s case¹ . Findings returned by the Hon’ble Coordinate Bench in Sapna Kumari’s case¹ were directed to be construed to have been passed in Dr. Abha Chauhan Khimta’s case² as well.

¶20

1CWP No. 10156/2023 decided on 24.04.2024

¶21

2CWP No.177/2024 decided on 01.08.2024

¶22

-5-

¶23

2(iv) The case set up by the petitioner & the reliefs prayed for by her in the present writ petition are similar to Sapna Kumari’s case¹ and Dr. Abha Chauhan Khimta’s case² .

¶24

Learned counsel for respondents-University placed reliance upon a decision rendered by the Hon’ble Apex Court in P.J. Dharmaraj vs. Church of South India & Ors.³ to contend that the UGC Regulations are not binding and are only recommendatory in nature. A perusal of the aforesaid decision reflects that the Hon’ble Apex Court after taking into consideration various judgments highlighting the binding nature of UGC Regulations, distinguished the said case on fact and only thereafter, reached on said conclusion. In the present case, it has been pleaded that UGC Guidelines have been adopted and followed by the respondentsUniversity, which fact even stands duly admitted by the respondents-University. The endeavour of the respondentsUniversity in the reply has been to oppose the petition by giving different interpretation to the UGC Regulations in question. Furthermore, it is not disputed that Dr. Abha Chauhan Khimta had been appointed as Assistant Professor in University Institute of Legal Studies on contract basis 3CA @ SLP (C) No.8457 of 2022 decided on 06.12.2024

¶25

-6-

¶26

under Self Financing Scheme. Once the service rendered under Self Finance Scheme has been counted in case of Dr. Abha Chauhan Khimta by the respondents, in view of the decision rendered in Dr. Sapna Kumari’s case¹ , there is no justification to treat the present petitioner any differently as she had also been appointed in the same institute under the same scheme though in different stream. In Dr. Sapna Kumari’s case¹ , it has already been held that UGC Regulations on Minimum Qualifications for appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and measures for the Maintenance of standards in Higher Education, 2010 are applicable to the respondentUniversity.

¶27

During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the respondents also submitted that the judgment rendered in Dr. Abha Chauhan Khimta’s case² has been implemented and contractual service rendered by her under Self Finance Scheme has been taken into consideration for the purpose of benefit of Career Advancement Scheme and all consequential benefits.

¶28

-7-

¶29

It will be in place to note that the Hon’ble Apex Court in Chairman/Managing Director, Uttar Pradesh Power Corporation Limited and others Vs. Ram Gopal⁴ , held that the State and its instrumentalities are expected to themselves extend the benefit of a judicial pronouncement delivered in rem to all similarly placed employees without forcing each person to individually knock the doors of Courts.

¶30

Following the decision in Arvind Kumar Srivastava’s case, Hon’ble Supreme Court in Rushibhai Jagdishchandra Pathak Vs. Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation⁵ , observed that normally as a model employer, on accepting a decision, the employer should uniformly apply and grant benefit to all its similarly situated employees to avoid unnecessary litigation before the Courts.

¶31

In view of above, this writ petition is allowed. Respondent-University is directed to count the entire contractual service rendered by the petitioner w.e.f. 29.06.2007 till 01.04.2014, from which date she was regularized as Assitant Professor (Law) in UILS in the

¶32

4(2021)3 SCCC 225

¶33

5Civil Appeal No.4134 of 2022 alongwith Civil Appeal Nos. 4135 4136 and 4137 of 2022, decided on 18th May, 2022

¶34

-8-

¶35

payscale of Rs.15600-3910 + 6000 AGP, for the purpose of granting benefit of Career Advancement Scheme to her, i.e. placement/grant of upward movement in the Stage-2 and Stage-3, respectively, with all consequential benefits within 6 weeks. Pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of.

¶36

Jyotsna Rewal Dua 10^th December, 2024 Judge (Pardeep)

Kusum Chauhan v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kusum Chauhan v. State of Hp and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arvind Singh Guleria Vs State of Hp and Others

Sher Singh Vs Rohan Chand Thakur

Jagat Kishore Vs Rohan Chand Thakur

Brij Lal Vs Hrtc and Another

Kailash Chand Vs Himachal Road Transport Corporation and Others

Ami Chand Vs Rakesh Kanwar and Others