Partly allowed

Sri M Gopal v. the Government of Karnataka

Karnataka HC6 Dec 2021WP/8484/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged an order quashing their unilateral grant of Pay Band IV Scale by Polytechnics. The Court quashed the order, directing the State to reconsidered petitions for grant of pay scale from eligible dates based on AICTE relaxations.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order quashed. State directed to reconsider petitions for Pay Band IV Scale from eligible dates and grant consequential benefits within six months.

Sri M Gopal Vs the Government of Karnataka — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Karnataka HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶2

DATED THIS THE 06^TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

¶3

BEFORE

¶4

THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION No.8484 OF 2020 (S- RES)

¶5

C/W.

¶6

WRIT PETITION No.3823 OF 2021 (S- RES)

¶7

IN WRIT PETITION No.8484 OF 2020

¶8

BETWEEN:

¶9

SRI M.GOPAL SON OF LATE MUDALAPPA, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, M.E.I.POLYTECHNIC, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶10

SRI Y.M. RAVINDRANATHA SON OF MALKAPPA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF ELEC. AND COM. ENGINEERING, M.E.I.POLYTECHNIC, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶11

SMT.SHREEVARSHINI M.R., D/O M.N.RAMACHANDRA, AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF COMP.SC. ENGINEERING, M.E.I.POLYTECHNIC, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶12

¶13

SRI A.SHREENIVASARAO S/O VITHAL, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF ELEC. AND COM. ENGINEERING, M.E.I.POLYTECHNIC, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶14

SMT.KAMALA H.C., W/O ESWARAPPA M.N, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER, SCIENCE DEPARTMENT, M.E.I.POLYTECHNIC, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶15

SMT.S.O.SUNITHA W/O.CHANDRAKANTHA K.O, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, M.E.I.POLYTECHNIC, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶16

SMT.M.USHA RANI W/O.KARUNAKARAN.S., AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF COMP.SC. ENGINEERING, M.E.I.POLYTECHNIC, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶17

SRI.SATISH B.K., S/O K.BANDAPPA, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF ELEC.AND COMMN. ENGINEERING, M.E.I.POLYTECHNIC, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶18

SRI HUCHEERAPPAHARIJAN S/O LATE BASAPPA H., AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER,

¶19

¶20

MECHANICAL ENGINEER DEPARTMENT, M.E.I.EVENING POLYTECHNIC, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶21

1. SRI.SHREEMANTH S/O LATE HANUMANTHRAO, AGED ABOUT 46 YEARS, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING, M.E.I.POLYTECHNIC, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶22

... PETITIONERS

¶23

(BY SRI JANARDHANA G., ADVOCATE (PHYSICAL HEARING))

¶24

AND:

¶25

THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA EDUCATION DEPARTMENT , (MINISTRY OF HIGHER EDUCATION) VIDHANASOUDHA, DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶26

DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶27

THE PRINCIPAL M.E.I.POLYTECHNIC, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶28

THE PRINCIPAL M.E.I.EVENING POLYTECHNIC, RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010. ... RESPONDENTS

¶29

(BY SMT.M.C.NAGASHREE, AGA FOR R1 AND R2 (PHYSICAL HEARING); SRI M.R.C. RAVI, ADVOCATE R3 AND R4)

¶30

¶31

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE ORDER DATED 22.03.2018 ISSUED BY THE R-2 TO THE R-3 AND R-4 TO STOP THE PAY BAND IV SCALE TO THE PETITIONERS VIDE ANNEXURE-B.

¶32

IN WRIT PETITION No.3823 OF 2021

¶33

BETWEEN:

¶34

SRI S.NAGARAJ S/O T.SUBBARAYAPPA AGED ABOUT 51 YEARS SELECTION GRADE LECUTURER DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICAL AND ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING M.E.I. POLYTECHNIC BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶35

SRI KUMAR S/O SAMYA NAIK AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS SELECTION GRADE LECUTURER DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING M.E.I.EVENING POLYTECHNIC BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶36

... PETITIONERS

¶37

(BY SRI JANARDHANA G., ADVOCATE (PHYSICAL HEARING))

¶38

AND:

¶39

THE GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA EDUCATION DEPARTMENT MINISTRY OF HIGHER EDUCATION VIDHANA SOUDHA DR.B.R.AMBEDKAR ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶40

DIRECTOR OF TECHNICAL EDUCATION PALACE ROAD BENGALURU - 560 001.

¶41

¶42

THE PRINCIPAL M.E.I. POLYTECHNIC RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶43

THE PRINCIPAL M.E.I.EVENING POLYTECHNIC RAJAJINAGAR, BENGALURU - 560 010.

¶44

... RESPONDENTS

¶45

(BY SMT.M.C.NAGASHREE, AGA FOR R1 AND R2 (PHYSICAL HEARING),

¶46

SRI M.R.C.RAVI, ADVOCATE FOR R3 AND R4)

¶47

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS TO GRANT PAY BAND IV SCALE WITH AGP OF RS.9,000/- TO THE PETITIONERS FROM 19.7.2017 AND 3.7.2018 RESPECTIVELY, AS PER THEIR ENTITLEMENT UNDER ANNEXURE-B AND CONSEQUENTLY GRANT FINANCIAL BENEFITS FROM THE SAID DATE.

¶48

THESE WRIT PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR ORDERS ON 15.11.2021, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING :-

¶49

ORDER

¶50

The petitioners in Writ Petition No.8484 of 2020 seek

¶51

the following prayers:

¶52

i) Quash the order dated 22-03-2018 No.DTE/19/EST 4 (B)(1) 2017/G714 issued by the 2^nd respondent to the 3^rd and 4^th respondents to stop the pay band IV scale to the petitioners vide Annexure-B;

¶53

¶54

(ii) Further direct the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 grant post facto approval of the pay band IV scale granted by the 3^rd and 4^th respondent and as per their request to grant post facto approval for the same.

¶55

(iii) Further issue a direction to pay all their arrears of salary stopped from 1-07-2018 till the date of payment; and

¶56

(iv) Grant any other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant to the petitioners in the circumstances of the case.

¶57

(v) Declare that Annexure-R9 dated 10-112020 in No. ED 167 DTE 2017 fixing the cutoff date on 07-11-2015 for granting promotional benefits to the lecturers working in the Polytechnic Institutions, including the petitioners is contrary to Annexure-R1 AICTE Regulations and mala fide one and not applicable to the petitioners for granting prayer sought for in the writ petition."

¶58

The petitioners in Writ Petition No.3823 of 2021 seek

¶59

the following prayers:

¶60

(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, directing the respondents to grant Pay Band IV Scale with AGP of Rs.9,000/to the petitioners from 19-07-2017 and 03-07-2018, respectively as per their entitlement under Annexure-B and consequently grant financial benefits from the said date; and

¶61

¶62

(ii) Grant any other writ, order or direction as this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant to the petitioner in the circumstances of the case."

¶63

Heard Sri G. Janardhana, learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt. M.C.Nagashree, learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and Sri M.R.C.Ravi, learned counsel for respondent Nos.3 and 4, in both the cases.

¶64

Brief facts leading to the filing of writ petition No.8484 of 2020, as borne out from the pleading are as follows:

¶65

Petitioner Nos.1 to 8, are all working as Lecturers in Selection Grade in the 3^rd respondent - M.E.I. Polytechnic (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Polytechnic’ for short) and petitioner Nos.9 and 10 are working as Lecturers in Selection Grade in the 4^th respondent - M.E.I. Evening Polytechnic (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Polytechnic’ for short) and petitioner Nos.1 to 8 and 10 claim to be recipients of Pay Band IV Scale with effect from 19.11.2015 and insofar as petitioner No.9 is concerned, is with effect from 06.12.2015.

¶66

¶67

All the petitioners entered the service of the Polytechnic in different Departments on 19-11-2001 and 06.12.2001 and have been from time to time promoted or granted applicable pay scale on completion of intermediate periods of service i.e., 5 years or 10 years as the case would be and at the relevant point in time on 19-11-2015 and 06.12.2015, the petitioners were placed in the pay scale of Pay Band IV. The applicable pay in Pay Band IV Scale was also paid to the petitioners. The pay scales and placement of pay band of the petitioners were pursuant to certain unilateral decision taken by respondent Nos.3 and 4 - Polytechnic, in whose institutions the petitioners were working as Lecturers in different discipline.

¶68

The 2^nd respondent/Director of Technical Education raised an objection to the grant of pay scale in Pay Band IV to the petitioners on 22-03-2018, solely on the ground that no prior approval was granted for placing the petitioners in Pay Band IV Scale. Grant of Pay Band IV Scale ought to have been done by a Committee constituted for the said purpose as is done in all other cases and respondent Nos.3 and 4 could

¶69

¶70

not have sought a post-facto approval from the hands of the 2^nd respondent and on that ground, directs that the cases of the petitioners being placed in Pay Band IV Scale, be withdrawn. Pay Band IV is in the pay scale of Rs.37,40067,000/- with AGP of Rs.9,000/-.

¶71

The claim of the petitioners is that, they were entitled to the said Pay Band scale as per the guidelines of the AICTE and such pay scale is under the Career Advancement Scheme. It is this action of Government declining to grant approval for grant of Pay Band IV Scale to the petitioners that has driven the petitioners to this Court.

¶72

The case of the petitioners in the companion writ petition i.e., Writ Petition No.3823 of 2021, in brief, are that, they are also working in the very same Polytechnic having joined service of the Polytechnic as Lecturers in different disciplines on 03-07-2004. The difference in the claim of the petitioners in both these cases is with regard to entitlement of the pay scale in terms of Pay Band IV Scale.

¶73

¶74

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would contend that in terms of the AICTE guidelines, the petitioners in W.P.No.8484 of 2020 are entitled to grant of Pay Band IV Scale with effect from 01-04-2011 itself and the same could not have been postponed by the State Government on the ground that the post-facto approval could not be granted and insofar petitioners in W.P.No.3823 of 2021 are concerned, they are entitled to the Pay Band IV Scale with effect from 19-07-2017 and 03-07-2018 respectively. The learned counsel would further contend that the implementation of the AICTE pay scale is done by the 1^st respondent/State to the teachers of Government and aided Polytechnics under the control of Higher Education Department of Government. It is only when it comes to the case of aided institutions, the State is now practicing invidious discrimination.

¶75

On the other hand, the learned Additional

¶76

Government Advocate, Smt. M.C.Nagashree, taking this Court to the detailed statement of objections filed, would contend that the petitioners are not entitled to such pay scale and has

¶77

¶78

also indicated eligibility dates of the petitioners for grant of Pay Band IV Scale.

¶79

I have given my anxious consideration to the submissions made by the respective learned counsel and perused the material on record.

¶80

The afore-narrated facts of appointment of the petitioners on the respective dates and grant of certain pay scale is not in dispute. The petitioners claim that they are entitled to Pay Band IV Scale of Rs.37,400-67000/- with applicable AGP of Rs.9,000/- with effect from 26-08-2011, which was granted by 3^rd and 4^th respondent/Polytechnic on 19-11-2015. The said grant pay scale was submitted for its approval to the 1^st respondent/ State. The State Government having noticed the fact that the decision to grant the petitioners pay scale applicable in Pay Band IV Scale without prior approval or recommendations of the Committee for grant of such pay band scale under the Career Advancement Scheme, declined to approve the same and directed that such decision should be taken only after prior approval. The

¶81

¶82

impugned communication to the 3^rd and 4^th respondent - Polytechnic dated 22-03-2018, reads as follows:

¶83

"«µÀAiÀÄ: ¤ªÀÄä ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ 16 DAiÉÄÌ ±ÉæÃtÂ G¥À£Áå¸ÀPÀjUÉ ¥ÉÃ ¨ÁåAqï - IV ¸Ë®¨sÀåªÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄAdÆgÀÄ ªÀiÁrgÀÄªÀÅzÀPÉÌ WÀl£ÉÆÃvÀÛgÀ C£ÀÄªÉÆÃzÀ£É ¤ÃqÀ®Ä PÉÆÃjgÀÄªÀ §UÉÎ.

¶84

G¯ÉèÃR: 1. ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ DzÉÃ±À ¸ÀASÉå:Er 15 rnE 2000 ¢£ÁAPÀ:28.07.2000

¶85

¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ DzÉÃ±À ¸ÀASÉå:Er 23 nE¹ 2011

¶86

¢£ÁAPÀ:21.02.2011

¶87

¤ªÀÄä ¥ÀvÀæ ¸A:JAEL¦/EJ¸ïn/JL¹n/PÉDqï/2017, À ¢:12.06.2017

¶88

¶89

ªÉÄÃ®ÌAqÀ «µÀAiÀÄPÉÌ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀAvÉ, G¯ÉèÃRzÀ ¥ÀvÀæzÀ°è ¤ªÀÄä ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ ««zsÀ «¨sÁUÀUÀ¼À°è PÁAiÀÄð ¤ªÀð»¸ÀÄwÛgÀÄªÀ 16 DAiÉÄÌ ±ÉæÃtÂ G¥À£Áå¸ÀPÀjUÉ ¥ÉÃ ¨ÁåAqï- IV ªÉÃvÀ£À ±ÉæÃtÂ 37400- 67000+9000 J.f.¦.AiÀÄ°è ¸ÁÜ¤ÃPÀj¹gÀÄªÀÅzÀPÉÌ WÀl£ÉÆÃvÀÛgÀ C£ÀÄªÉÆÃzÀ£É ¤ÃqÀ®Ä PÉÆÃjgÀÄwÛÃj.

¶90

F §UÉÎ ¥Àj²Ã°¸À¯ÁV, ¸ÀPÁðj / C£ÀÄzÁ¤vÀ ¥Á°mÉQßPï ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÀ¼À ¨ÉÆÃzsÀPÀ ªÀÈAzÀzÀªÀjUÉ PÉjAiÀÄgï CqÁé£ïìªÉÄAmï AiÉÆÃd£ÉAiÀÄr ªÀÄÄA§rÛ ¤ÃqÀ®Ä G¯ÉèÃR 02 gÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ DzÉÃ±ÀzÀ°è vÁAwæPÀ ²PÀët ¤zÉÃð±ÀPÀgÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ «µÀAiÀÄ vÀdÐgÀÄUÀ¼À£ÉÆß¼ÀUÉÆAqÀ ¸ÁÜ¤ÃPÀgÀt DAiÉÄÌ ªÉÃvÀ£À ±ÉæÃtÂ / J.f.¦.ªÀÄAdÆgÁwUÉ ¸ÀA§A¢ü¹zÀ J¯Áè ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀzÀj ¸ÁÜ¤ÃPÀgÀt DAiÉÄÌ ¸À«ÄwAiÉÄzÀÄgÀÄ ªÀÄAr¹ ¸À«ÄwAiÀÄÄ C£ÀÄªÉÆÃzÀ£É ¤ÃrzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ F ¸Ë®¨sÀåUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ªÀÄAdÆgÀÄ ªÀiÁqÀÄªÀ §UÉÎ DzÉÃ±À ºÉÆgÀr¸À¨ÉÃPÁVgÀÄvÀÛzÉ.

¶91

¥Àæ¸ÀÄÛvÀ ¤ªÀÄä ¥ÀvÀæzÀ°è ¥Àæ¸ÁÛ¦¹gÀÄªÀ 16 G¥À£Áå¸ÀPÀgÀ£ÀÄß M¼ÀUÉÆAqÀAvÉ ¤ªÀÄä ¸ÀA¸ÉÜAiÀÄ EvÀgÉ G¥À£Áå¸ÀPÀjUÉ F »AzÉ »jAiÀÄ / DAiÉÄÌ ªÉÃvÀ£À ±ÉæÃtÂ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J.f.¦. ¸Ë®¨sÀåUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ªÀÄAdÆgÀÄ ªÀiÁqÀÄªÀ ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°èAiÀÄÆ ªÉÄÃ®ÌAqÀ «zsÁ£ÀzÀ°èAiÉÄÃ ¥Àj²Ã°¹ ªÀÄAdÆgÀÄ ªÀiÁqÀ¯ÁVzÉ. F §UÉÎ w¼ÀªÀ½PÉ EzÀÝgÀÆ ¸ÀºÀ ¤ªÀÄä ºÀAvÀzÀ°èAiÉÄÃ ¥ÉÃ ¨ÁåAqï- EªÀ ¸Ë®¨sÀåªÀ£ÀÄß ªÀÄAdÆgÀÄ ªÀiÁrgÀÄªÀ §UÉÎ PÀÆqÀ¯ÉÃ «ªÀgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¤ÃqÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ ºÁUÀÆ ¸ÀzÀj G¥À£Áå¸ÀPÀjUÉ ¥ÉÃ ¨ÁåAqï - IV ªÉÃvÀ£À ±ÉæÃtÂAiÀÄ°è ¥ÁªÀw¹gÀÄªÀ ªÉÃvÀ£À ¸Ë®¨sÀåUÀ¼À£ÀÄß PÀÆqÀ¯É

¶92

¶93

¸ÀÜVvÀUÉÆ½¹ ªÀgÀ¢ ¸À°è¸ÀvÀPÀÌzÀÄÝ. E®è¢zÀÝ°è ¤ªÀÄä «gÀÄzÀÞ ¤AiÀÄªÀiÁ£ÀÄ¸ÁgÀ PÀæªÀÄ PÉÊUÉÆ¼ÀÄîªÀ §UÉÎ ¥Àj²Ã°¸À¯ÁUÀÄªÀÅzÀÄ. ªÀÄÄAzÀÄªÀgÉzÀÄ, E£ÀÄß ªÀÄÄAzÉ AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉÃ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£É ¸À°è¸ÀÄªÁUÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtzÀ ¥ÀÆtð «ªÀgÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¥ÀÆgÀPÀ zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼ÉÆA¢UÉ ¸À°è¸ÀvÀPÀÌzÉÝAzÀÄ F ªÀÄÆ®PÀ ¸ÀÆa¸À¯ÁVzÉ."

¶94

The reason indicated in the communication is that, in terms of Government Order dated 21-02-2011, pay scale to be granted under the Career Advancement Scheme had to be placed before the Technical Committee and on the recommendation of the said Committee, further proceedings ought to have been taken. There can be no question of a postfacto approval of a unilateral decision of the Polytechnic, is what the communication reads. Subsequent to issuance of the impugned communication dated 22-03-2018, certain other correspondences have taken place between the Polytechnic and the State. The question now remains is, whether the petitioners are entitled to Pay Band IV Scale of Rs.37,400 - 67,000/- with effect from 19-11-2015 and 06.12.2015 or with effect from 26-08-2011 as is claimed by the petitioners in W.P.No.8484 of 2020?

¶95

It is the contention of the petitioners that they are entitled to such pay scale from 26-08-2011 and it is the stand

¶96

¶97

of the State that the petitioners are entitled to such pay scale with effect from 19-11-2015 and 06.12.2015. The State has in its objections contended that eligibility dates of the petitioners for Pay Band IV Scale is as enlisted in the chart, which all dates to 19-11-2015 and in respect of 9^th petitioner it is 06-12-2015. The said dates are indicated by Government on the strength of certain proceedings of the Screening/Scrutiny Committee to declare eligibility of Lecturers under the Career Advancement Scheme dated 19-11-2015. The Committee claims to have decided the issue on application of AICTE pay scale and its implementation by the State Government with effect from 31-03-2011. The observations of the Committee at Clauses 8, 10 and 12 are germane for a consideration of the lis and are extracted for the purpose of quick reference.

¶98

“viii) The pay of the incumbents to the posts of Lecturer (Senior Scale) (i.e. the pre- revised scale of Rs.10000- 15200) shall be fixed at the appropriate stage in Pay Band of Rs.15600- 39100 based on their present pay, with AGP of Rs.7000.

¶99

¶100

(x) Incumbent Lecturers (Selection Grade) who have completed 3 years in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.12000 - 18300 on 1.4.2011 shall be placed in Pay Band of Rs.37400 - 67000 with AGP Pay of Rs.9000 and shall be continued to be designated as Lecturers (Selection Grade).

¶101

….. …. ….. ….. …. ….

¶102

(xii) Lecturers (Selection Grade), completing 3 years of teaching with the AGP of Rs.8000 shall be eligible, subject to other conditions, as may be prescribed by AICTE, to move to the Pay Band of Rs.37400 - 67000 with AGP of Rs.9000."

¶103

(emphasis added)

¶104

The ultimate opinion of the Committee was that, the petitioners would be entitled to pay scale of Rs.37,40067,000/- from a particular date in Pay Band IV scale and the recommendation of the Committee reads as follows:

¶105

"E) JL¹nE ªÃvÉ £À ±À æÃtÉ gÂ Æ.15600À - 39100 g°è Jf¦ gÀ Æ.8000 jAzÀ À ¥Ã ¨ÁåAqÉ ï - 4 ªÃvÉ £À ±À æÃtÉ gÂ Æ.37400À - 67000g°è Jf¦ gÀ Æ.9000À

¶106

JA.E.L. ¥Á°mÉQßPï (C£ÀÄzÁ¤vÀ), ¨ÉAUÀ¼ÀÆgÀÄ ¥ÁæA±ÀÄ¥Á®gÀÄ ¥ÉÃ ¨ÁåAqï- IV ªÉÃvÀ£À ±ÉæÃtÂ gÀÆ.37,400- 67,000 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ Jf¦ gÀÆ.9000/£ÀÄß ªÀÄAdÆgÀÄ ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä ¸À°è¹zÀÝ MlÄÖ 18 ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£ÉUÀ¼À°è, CºÀð 10 ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÁÜ¤ÃPÀgÀt DAiÉÄÌ ¸À«Äw ªÀÄÄAzÉ ªÀÄAr¸À¯ÁVvÀÄ, ¸ÀzÀj 10 ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼ÀÄ 06£ÉÃ (¥ÀjµÀÌøvÀ) JL¹nE ªÉÃvÀ£À ±ÉæÃtÂAiÀÄ 'PÉjAiÀÄgï CqÁé£ïìªÉÄAmï AiÉÆÃd£É'AiÀÄ C¥ÉArPïì - 2gÀ PÀArPÉ (11 & 120 gÀ C£ÀéAiÀÄ

¶107

¶108

DAiÉÄÌ ªÉÃvÀ£À ±ÉæÃtÂ / J.f.¦. gÀÆ.8,000/- gÀ°è 3ªÀµÀðUÀ¼À ¸ÉÃªÉ, 06 ªÁgÀUÀ¼À C¯ÁàªÀ¢ü vÀgÀ¨ÉÃwUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥Àj²Ã°¸À¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀzÀjAiÀÄªÀgÀ PÁAiÀÄð¤ªÀðºÀuÁ ªÀgÀ¢UÀ¼À°è AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉÃ ¥ÀæwPÀÆ® nÃPÉUÀ¼ÀÄ E®èzÀjªÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß ºÁUÀÆ G¥À£Áå¸ÀPÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ¨ÁQ E®è¢gÀÄªÀÅzÀ£ÀÄß PÀÆ®APÀµÀªÁV ¥Àj²Ã°¹ ¥ÉÃ ¨ÁåAqï- IV ªÉÃvÀ£À ±ÉæÃtÂ gÀÆ.37,40067,000+Jf¦ gÀÆ.9,000/£ÀÄß ªÀÄAdÆgÀÄ ªÀiÁqÀ®Ä ¸À«ÄwAiÀÄÄ ¸ÀªÁð£ÀÄªÀÄvÀ¢AzÀ M¦àUÉ ¤ÃrvÀÄ.

¶109

PÀæ.¸ÀA	«¨sÁUÀ	G¥À£Áå¸ÀPÀgÀÄUÀ¼À ¸ÀASÉå
1	ªÉÄPÁ¤PÀ¯ï EAf¤AiÀÄjAUï	02
2	¹«¯ï EAf¤AiÀÄjAUï	02
3	E£ïìlÄæªÉÄAmÉ±Àï & PÀAmÉÆæÃ¯ï	01
4	J¯ÉPÁÖç¤Pïì& PÀªÀÄÄå¤PÉÃµÀ£ï	01
5	«zÀÄåvï	03
6	PÀA¥ÀÆålgï ¸ÉÊ£ïì	01
	MlÄÖ	10

¶110

DqÀ½vÁ¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÁzÀ ²æÃ ¥ÀÄgÀÄµÉÆÃvÀÛªÀiï EªÀgÀÄ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è ºÁdjzÀÝ CzsÀåPÀëjUÉ, ¸ÀzÀ¸ÀåjUÉ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ J¯Áè «µÀAiÀÄ ¥ÀjtÂvÀjUÉ zsÀ£ÀåªÁzÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß C¦ð¸ÀÄªÀ ªÀÄÆ®PÀ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄÄ ªÀÄÄPÁÛAiÀÄUÉÆArvÀÄ.

¶111

AICTE Notification no.:F.No.27/RIFD/Pay Scale/01/2013- 14, ¢:04- 01- 2016gÀ ¸Àà¶ÖÃPÀgÀtzÀ ¥ÀÄl ¸ÀASÉå (27)gÀ PÀæ.¸ÀA.(38)gÀ°è "Relaxation in API score is applicable for the period of 03 years only (till date 7- 11- 2015) from the issue of AICTE Regulations 2012 in Official Gazette. Thereafter, API score shall be implemented." JAzÀÄ ¸Àà¶ÜÃPÀgÀt ¤ÃrgÀÄvÀÛzÉ. F §UÉÎ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è ZÀað¹, £ÀªÉA§gï - 2015gÀ M¼ÀUÉ »jAiÀÄ ±ÉæÃtÂ / DAiÉÄÌ ªÉÃvÀ£À ±ÉæÃtÂ / Jf¦UÀ½UÉ CºÀðvÉ ºÉÆA¢gÀÄªÀ G¥À£Áå¸ÀPÀgÀ£ÀÄß ªÀiÁvÀæ ¥ÀjUÀtÂ¸À®Ä ºÁUÀÆ £ÀªÉA§gï- 2015gÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ CºÀðvÉ ºÉÆA¢gÀÄªÀªÀgÀ£ÀÄß "J.¦.L. DzsÁjvÀ ¹.J.J¸ï. ¤AiÀÄªÀÄUÀ¼À" ¸ÀPÁðj DzÉÃ±À §AzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ ¤AiÀÄªÀiÁ£ÀÄ¸ÁgÀ ¥ÀjUÀtÂ¸ÀÄªÀ §UÉÎ ¸À¨sÉAiÀÄ°è PÀÆ®APÀÄµÀªÁV ZÀað¹ wÃªÀiÁð£À PÉÊUÉÆ¼Àî¯Á¬ÄvÀÄ."

¶112

¶113

The findings of the Committee as afore-extracted is in interpretation of the clarificatory notification issued by the AICTE on 04.01.2016, in terms of Clarifications on certain issues/anomalies pertaining to qualifications, pay scales, service conditions, Career Advancement Schemes etc. for teachers and other academic staff of Technical Institutions (Degree/Diploma). The AICTE having noticed certain anomalies pertaining to qualifications, pay scales, service conditions and Career Advancement Scheme thought it appropriate to issue the clarification with regard to the conditions for grant of pay scale under the Career Advancement Scheme. Clause 38 of the said clarification reads as follows:

¶114

"(D) ISSUES RELATED TO CAREER ADVANCEMENT SCHEME.

¶115

*Sl.No.*	*Issue*	*Clarification*
*38.*	*Consideration* to *relax* *API* *score* *(Degree/* *Diploma) between* 5^thMarch 2010 *and* *issue* of *AICTE* *Regulations,*	*Relaxation in API* *score is* *applicable for the* *period of 03* *years only (till* *date 7.11.2015)* *from the issue of* *AICTE*

¶116

¶117

*2012* on 8^th	*Regulations 2012*
*November 2012.*	*in Official*
	*Gazette.*
	*Thereafter, API*
	*score shall be*
	*implemented.”*

¶118

(emphasis supplied)

¶119

The said clarification was with regard to API score between 5^th March, 2010 and issuance of AICTE Regulations 2012, which came about on 8^th November, 2012. The clarification that is issued is that, API is to be relaxed for a period of 03 years only till 07.11.2015, from the date of issue of AICTE Regulations, 2012 in the Official Gazette. These clarifications issued by the AICTE do not bear consideration in the impugned order.

¶120

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners also placed on record a subsequent communication issued by the AICTE dated 05-08-2021, which is by way of a public notice. The notice reads as follows:

¶121

" Public Notice For Faculty Members and Employers – Extension of the Date for Completing Orientation/ Refresher Courses for Promotion under CAS.

¶122

¶123

All India Council for Technical Education vide Sl.No.11 of AICTE Gazette Notification dated 20-052020 had clarified that there shall be no relaxation in the mandatory requirement of total duration of programmes for promotion under CAS for faculty members/Librarians/ PTIs in Degree/Diploma level Institutions. It was also clarified that one time extension for completion of these programmes had already been given until 7-11-2015.

¶124

The University Grant Commission vide its Public Notice 2-16/2002(PS)/Pt.FI.II dated 16^th October 2018 had extended the date of participation/completion in Orientation/Refresher courses/Short Term Training Programmes/Continuing Education Programmes for promotion under CAS up to 31-12-2018 with respect to 6^th CPC. In view of the same, the Council too has decided to extend the date for completing Orientation/Refresher Courses/Short Term Training Programmes/Continuing Education Programmes, for promotion under CAS for faculty members/Librarians/PTIs in Degree/Diploma level Institutions up to 31-12-2018 for all the candidates to ensure uniformity.

¶125

All the AICTE approved Institutions are requested to comply with the above provision of extension.”

¶126

The said public notice clarifies with the AICTE Gazette Notification dated 20^th May, 2020, that no relaxation in the mandatory requirement of total duration of programmes under CAS in the Institutions. It was also clarified that one time relaxation for completion of those programmes has

¶127

¶128

already been given until 07-11-2015. This is a vindication of the stand of the petitioners that they are entitled to the said relaxation that is granted. The petitioners claim to have become eligible for grant of Pay Band IV Scale with effect from 26-08-2011.

¶129

None of these contentions of the State, which is filed by way of statement of objections bear reference in the order impugned. The order impugned is plain and simple, that cases of petitioners for placement in Pay Band IV Scale of Rs.37,400-67,000/- was to be granted, only pursuant to a Selection/Scrutiny Committee. The College could not have unilaterally decided to grant the aforesaid pay scale and later seek a post-facto approval. In the light of the objections filed by the State, Rejoinder or a Sur-rejoinder in the cases at hand would render the order impugned unsustainable and consequently, the cases of the petitioners will have to be reconsidered by the State, in the light of relaxation granted by the AICTE and the AICTE further clarifying the position in the aforesaid clarification issued by way of public notice.

¶130

¶131

For the aforesaid reasons, I pass the following:

¶132

ORDER

¶133

(i) The writ petitions are allowed in part.

¶134

IN W.P.NO.8484 of 2020

¶135

(ii) Impugned order dated 22-03-2019 stands quashed.

¶136

(iii) The first and second respondents/State is directed to re-consider the cases of the petitioners for grant of Pay Band IV Scale of Rs.37,400-67,000/- with AGP of Rs.9,000/after assessment of entitlement of the petitioners with effect from a retrospective date as is claimed and not from 07-11-2015, as is indicated by the respondents/State.

¶137

IN W.P.NO.3823 OF 2021

¶138

(iv) The respondents/State is directed to consider the cases of the petitioners and assess entitlement of their claim for grant of Pay Band IV Scale with effect from 19-07-2017 and 03-07-2018 as sought.

¶139

(v) The aforesaid exercise of reconsideration of the cases of the petitioners in both the writ petitions shall be concluded within six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

¶140

(vi) The petitioners in both these cases shall be entitled to all consequential benefits that would flow from the decision that would be taken by the State Government in the cases now remitted for reconsideration.

¶141

¶142

In view of the disposal of the writ petitions, I.A.Nos.1 and 2 of 2021, do not survive for consideration

¶143

and the same are disposed.

¶144

Sd/JUDGE

¶145

nvj CT:MJ

Sri M Gopal v. the Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sri M Gopal v. the Government of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mohammed Ilyas Ahmed Vs Deputy Commissioner

L Anand Kumar Vs the Commissioner

Smt Qurrath Ravoof Vs Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike

Sri Harish K L Vs the District Electoral Officer

Shivananda. H. S. Vs Vidyashree H. E.

Sri S v Ramesh Vs Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board