Partly allowed

Mr Sanjeevaiah H v. the State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC5 Sept 2024WP/23600/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners with NET/KSET/Ph.D qualifications challenged guest faculty selection notifications allowing PG-only candidates time till 13.01.2025 to obtain NET/SLET/Ph.D. The court held respondents misconstrued an earlier order and directed strict compliance with UGC Regulations, 2018 minimum qualifications for guest lecturer selections.

What did the court decide?

Respondents 1 and 2 directed to ensure only candidates possessing UGC Regulations, 2018 minimum qualifications are selected as Guest Lecturers; past-service weightage continues; no conditional selecti

Mr Sanjeevaiah H Vs the State of Karnataka — Education and Admissions | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 5^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 23600 OF 2023 (S-RES)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

MR. SANJEEVAIAH H AGED ABOUT 31 YEARS S/O HANUMANTHARAYAPPA R/OF ALUR, BANAVADI POST, SOLUR HOBLI, MAGADI TALUK, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT-562127.

¶8

MRS. SONU SEN AGED ABOUT 27 YEARS D/O GANESH LAL R/OF DODDA GARADI STREET HASSAN-573201

¶9

Digitally signed by MARKONAHALLI RAMU PRIYA Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶10

MR. MADHUSUDAN C., AGED ABOUT 28 YEARS S/O CHANDREGOWDA R/OF MANUGANAHALLI VILLAGE AND POST BILIKERE HOBLI, HUNSUR TALUK, MYSORE-571103.

¶11

MR. SANDARSHA H.L. AGED ABOUT 44 YEARS S/O LAXMANAPPA R/AT NO.424, 1^ST FLOOR, SUVARNA NILAYA, 3^RD CROSS, SUBHASHNAGARA, B. KAATIHALLI, HASSAN-573201.

¶12

…PETITIONERS

¶13

(BY SRI. RAJENDRA KUMAR SUNGAY T P., ADVOCATE)

¶14

2 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶15

AND:

¶16

THE STATE OF KARNATAKA DEPARTMETN OF HIGHER EDUCATION VIDHANA SOUDHA BANGALORE-560001 REP. BY ITS SECRETARY

¶17

THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION, SHESHADRI ROAD, BANGALORE-560001.

¶18

UNIVERSITY GRANT COMMISSION BAHADUR SHAH ZAFAR MARG NEW DELHI-110002 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶19

…RESPONDENTS

¶20

(BY SRI. PRINCE ISAAC, ADDITIONAL GOVERNMENT ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NOS.1 AND 2;

¶21

SRI. H.R.SHOWRI, ADVOCATE FOR RESPONDENT NO.3)

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED NOTIFICATION DATED 24.08.2023 (ANNEXURE-J) IN SO FAR AS SELECTION OF PG GRADUATES ONLY WITHOUT INSISTING NET/SLET/PH.D WHICH IS CONTRARY TO UGC REGULATIONS, 2018 AND GUIDELINES 2019 AND DIRECTING THE RESPONDENT NO.2 TO REDO THE ENTIRE 1^ST ROUND OF COUNSELLING WHICH HAS TAKEN PLACE BY THE 2^ND RESPONDENT STRICTLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE UGC REGULATIONS, 2018 AND UGC GUIDELINES AND THEREAFTER MAKE APPOINTMENTS AND ETC.

¶23

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶24

CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE R. NATARAJ

¶25

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶26

ORAL ORDER

¶27

The petitioners have challenged the notification bearing No.PÁ²E/£ÉÃ«-1/CGD/90/2023-24 dated 24.08.2023 (Annexure -

¶28

J) in so far as selection of PG Graduates only without insisting NET/SLET/Ph.D, on the ground that it is contrary to UGC Regulations, 2018 and Guidelines, 2019 and to direct the respondent No.2 to redo the entire first round of counseling conducted by respondent No.2 strictly in accordance with the UGC Regulations, 2018 and UCG Guidelines and thereafter make appointments. The petitioners have also sought for a direction to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to select only the candidates, who possess qualification in terms of UGC Regulations, 2018 and also the guidelines bearing No.F.251/2018(PS/MISC.) dated 28.01.2019 for the academic year 2024-25 and subsequent academic years.

¶29

The petitioners contend that they have all completed their Master Degree and have also qualified in Karnataka State Eligibility Test (KSET) / State Eligibility Test (SET) / National Eligibility Test (NET) / Ph.D. examinations etc., Therefore, they contend that they have qualified to hold the

¶30

4 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶31

post of Assistant Professors in the Universities / Degree / PG Colleges in the State of Karnataka. The petitioners contend that the respondent No.3 has framed the "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, 2018" (henceforth referred to as "UGC Regulations, 2018"). Regulation No.13 prescribes qualification for the post of Guest/Contract/Temporary teaching faculty in respect of Higher Education Institutions, which is mandatory for all the Institutions/Universities according to which, the qualification prescribed is a Post-Graduation Degree and pass in NET/SLET or Ph.D. Apart from the said Regulations of 2018, the respondent No.3 has issued revised guidelines in respect of enhancement of Honorarium to the guest faculty dated 28.01.2019 reiterating the said qualification. The petitioners contend that the respondent No.2 had issued a notification dated 24.08.2023 and invited the applications to fill up the posts of guest faculty for the academic year 2022-23 in the Government colleges throughout the State by prescribing only the PG degree without insisting a pass in NET/SLET/Ph.D but

¶32

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶33

granted three years time to such candidates to clear the said tests, which was in violation of the qualification prescribed by the respondent No.3. The petitioners contend that several candidates, who have cleared NET/SLET/Ph.D, had approached this Court challenging Clause 6 Government order dated 14.01.2022 in W.P.No.3079/2022 and connected cases, which ultimately came to be disposed off vide order dated 11.01.2023 with the following observation:-

¶34

"For the foregoing, the writ petitions stand disposed of with the observation that the Government must consider continuing Clause-6 of the impugned Government Order dated 14.01.2022 for the academic years hereafter in the light of Regulation No.13 of the UGC Regulations."

¶35

The petitioners contend that the observation made

¶36

by this Court as recorded above is ambiguous, arbitrary and without application of mind to the circumstances of the case and would arm the State Government to accommodate those who do not possess minimum qualification as Guest Lecturers in terms of the UGC Regulations, referred supra. The petitioners contend that after W.P.No.3079/2022 and connected cases

¶37

¶38

NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶39

were disposed off, the respondent No.1 has issued two Government Orders dated 14.01.2022 and 27.01.2023 by which the State Government has decided to continue to appoint candidates with only PG qualification and also by awarding weightage of marks to the previous service rendered by contractual Assistant Professor upto 16 years at the rate of 3 marks per year subject to a maximum of 48 marks and also permitted such candidates to clear NET/SLET/Ph.D on or before 13.01.2025. The petitioners contend that this too was in violation of the UGC Regulations, referred above. Further, it is contended that the respondent No.2 vide notifications dated 24.08.2023 and 13.09.2023 had invited applications from the eligible candidates for the selection of the posts of guest faculty of First Grade Colleges in the State of Karnataka for the academic year 2023-24. In terms of these two notifications, the qualification prescribed was a Post Graduation in the respective disciplines and weightage of 3 marks for every year of service as Guest Lectures subject to the maximum of 16 years, for NET/KSET each candidate will be awarded 9 marks, for Ph.D. 12 marks, for M.Phil. 6 marks and 25% marks for Post-Graduation. The petitioners therefore, contend that the

¶40

¶41

NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶42

above said notifications are also not as per the revised guidelines dated 28.01.2019 issued by the respondent No.3. The petitioners contend that respondent Nos.1 and 2 vide order dated 27.01.2023 has modified Clause 6 of the Government order dated 14.01.2022 without amending the other Clause, which co-relates with Clause 6 and in the same order, the Government has modified Clause 6 to the extent of giving opportunity to the aspirants to possess the minimum required qualification prescribed by the UGC by 2025. Thus in a sense, it is contended that the order dated 27.01.2023 passed by the State Government is not in accordance with the UGC Guidelines either in terms of required qualification or honorarium to be paid to the Guest Lecturers. It is contended that the petitioners had applied online for selection to the post of Guest faculty Lecturers for the academic year 2023-24. As per the merit list prepared by the respondent No.2, the petitioners were assigned rank Nos.2553, 2696, 2343 and 1860 respectively based on the marks awarded as per guidelines stated in Government Order dated 14.06.2019. As a result, none of the petitioners could be selected as they were outweighed by those candidates who had secured previous work experience and weightage of marks with

¶43

8 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶44

only PG qualification. The petitioners contend that as a result of such exercise, the candidates such as petitioners, who possess all the requisite qualifications have been deprived of an opportunity while those candidates who were serving as guest lecturers in the past, got selected because of the weightage that is provided in the notifications, referred supra and a provision to obtain the additional qualification within the extended time. In order to remedy the anomaly, the petitioners submitted representations to the respondent No.3 to take suitable action in the matter. However, the respondent No.3 has slept over it. Therefore, the petitioners are constrained to approach this Court by this writ petition.

¶45

The learned counsel for the petitioners contended

¶46

that as per the UGC Regulations, 2018, prescribed qualification for the post of Assistant Professor is,

¶47

"I. Assistant Professor:

¶48

Eligibility (A or B):

¶49

¶50

i) A Master's degree with 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point-scale wherever the grading system is followed: in a

¶51

9 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶52

concerned/relevant/allied subject from an Indian University, or an equivalent degree from an accredited foreign university.

¶53

ii) Besides fulfilling the above qualifications, the candidate must have cleared the National Eligibility Test (NET) conducted by the UGC or the CSIR, or a similar test accredited by the UGC, like SLET/SET or who are or have been awarded a Ph. D. Degree in accordance with the University Grants Commission (Minimum Standards and Procedure for Award of M.Phil/Ph.D. Degree) Regulations, 2009 or 2016 and their amendments from time to time as the case may be exempted from NET/SLET/SET:

¶54

Provided , the candidates registered for the Ph.D. programme prior to July 11, 2009, shall be governed by the provisions of the then existing Ordinances/Bye-laws/Regulations of the Institution awarding the degree and such Ph.D. candidates shall be exempted from the requirement of NET/SLET/SET for recruitment and appointment of Assistant Professor or equivalent positions in Universities/Colleges/ Institutions subject to the fulfillment of the following conditions:-

¶55

a) The Ph.D. degree of the candidate has been awarded in a regular mode;

¶56

10 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶57

b) The Ph.D. thesis has been evaluated by at least two external examiners;

¶58

c) An open Ph.D. viva voce of the candidate has been conducted;

¶59

d) The Candidate has published two research papers from his/her Ph.D. work, out of which at least one is in a refereed journal;

¶60

e) The candidate has presented at least two papers based on his/her Ph.D work in conferences/seminars sponsored/funded/ supported by the UGC/ICSSR/CSIR or any similar agency.

¶61

The fulfilment of these conditions is to be certified by the Registrar or the Dean (Academic Affairs) of the University concerned.

¶62

Note: NET/SLET/SET shall also not be required for such Masters Programmes in disciplines for which NET/SLET/SET is not conducted by the UGC, CSIR or similar test accredited by the UGC, bike SLET/SET

¶63

¶64

B. The Ph.D degree has been obtained from a foreign university/institution with a ranking among top 500 in the World University Ranking (at any time) by any one of the following (1)

¶65

11 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶66

Quacquarelli Symonds (QS) (ii) the Times Higher Education (THE) or (iii) the Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU) of the Shanghai Jiao Tong University (Shanghai)

¶67

Note: The Academic scare as specified in Appendix-II (Table 3A) for Universities, and Appendix II (Table 3B) for Colleges, shall be considered for short-listing of the candidates for interview only, and the selections shall be based only on the performance in the interview."

¶68

In so far appointment on contract basis, Regulation No.13 provides the following:

¶69

"13.0 Appointment on Contract Basis

¶70

The teachers should be appointed on contract basis only when it is absolutely necessary and when the student-teacher ratio does not satisfy the laid-down norms. In any case, the number of such appointments should not exceed 10% of the total number of faculty positions in a College/University. The qualifications and selection procedure for appointing them should be the same as those applicable to a regularly-appointed teacher. The fixed emoluments paid to such contract teachers should be less than the monthly gross salary of a regularly

¶71

12 -

¶72

NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶73

appointed Assistant Professor. Such appointments should not be made initially for more than one academic session and the performance of any such entrant teacher should be reviewed for academic performance before reappointing him/her on contract basis for another session. Such appointments on contract basis may be also be resorted to when absolutely necessary to fill vacancies arising due to maternity leave, child-care leave, etc.

¶74

He therefore, contends that it is inevitable that in every selection, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 should insist upon the candidates to possess qualification, which are stated in the above paragraphs. He contends that contrarily, the respondents have been processing the applications of candidates, who possess a mere PG qualification and factoring the weightage for the previous years of service. He therefore, contends that this would deprive the candidates such as, the petitioners who have an opportunity to participate in the recruitment process. He therefore, prays that process of selection undertaken by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 be set at naught and suitable direction be issued to the respondents to select only those candidates, who fulfill the qualifications prescribed by the respondent No.2 under the UGC Regulations, 2018, referred supra.

¶75

13 -

¶76

NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶77

Per contra, the respondents, who have filed a detailed statement of objections contended that writ petition filed before this Court is not maintainable since the petitioners have challenged the notification, which pertains to engaging guest faculty in the Government First Grade Colleges in the State and therefore, it is the Tribunal constituted under the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1988, which alone should look into the matters of recruitment. Therefore, it is contended that the petitioners are bound to approach the Karnataka State Administrative Tribunal for redressal of their grievance. It is also contended that during the year 2021, the Guest Lecturers working in Government First Grade colleges across the State through their association sought enhancement of their remuneration and service security and also sought other connected demands. Accordingly, the Committee was formed by the State Government and on the basis of report submitted by the Committee on 12.01.2022, the Government issued order dated 14.01.2022. As per the said Government Order, the maximum workload to be allotted to a guest faculty was 15 hours per week and remuneration was fixed on the basis of qualification and tenure of service as a guest faculty. It was

¶78

14 -

¶79

NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶80

also stated therein that the tenure of the guest faculty would be 10 months for the academic year and in the Clause 6 of the said Government Order, a direction was given to those guest faculty,

¶81

who did not possess prescribed qualification as per the UGC Regulations, 2018 to acquire the same within 3 years and if they fail to possess UGC prescribed qualification within 3 years, then they would not be considered for selection of guest faculty. Based on the said Government Order dated 14.01.2022, the Circular dated 17.01.2022 was issued whereby it fixed the following norms for selection of guest faculty:-

¶82

Sl.	Qualification	Maximum
No.		marks
01	Qualification: 25% of PG marks	25
	Ex: If a candidate has scored 60%
	in his PG exams - then 25% of the
	same i.e., 15 marks has to be taken into consideration.
02	Additional Qualification:
	1) If PhD qualification obtained	12
	2) If NET/KSET/SLET exams passed	09
	3) If MPhil exams passed	06
03	Experience:	48
	Service rendered as guest lecturer

¶83

15 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶84

in Government First Grade
colleges - for every academic year
03 marks subject to a maximum
of 48 marks for 16 years (For
every completed academic year 03
marks,
For completion 01 semester in a
academic year 1.5 marks
Total 100
For Physically handicapped
persons additional 10 marks
should be given

¶85

It is contended that the selection process of guest faculty was undertaken on the basis of the above criteria.

¶86

Some persons who were not selected as guest faculty approached this Court challenging the allotment of 48 marks for experience in selection process. It is contended that the allocation of marks for past service was not something new but was provided as per the Circular dated 17.01.2022 and was followed during the previous years as well. It is contended that the same criteria was adopted since the academic year 2019-20 when a Circular was issued on 14.06.2022 allocating maximum of 48 marks to experience. The writ petitions filed by those

¶87

16 -

¶88

NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶89

candidates, who were not selected were disposed off on 11.01.2023 directing that the Government must consider continuing Clause-6 of the Government Order dated 14.01.2022

¶90

for the academic years hereafter in light of the Regulation No.13 of the UGC Regulations, 2018. The said observation was made on the basis of submission made by the counsel for UGC that even for appointment of Guest Lecturer, the minimum education qualification prescribed by the UGC must be insisted upon. Therefore, it is contended that the condition prescribed for possessing prescribed qualification, is not done away with but an opportunity is given to those guest faculty, who did not possess the same to obtain within 3 years considering their long tenure as guest faculty. It is further contended that pursuant to the Government Order dated 27.01.2023, the respondent No.2 issued a Circular publishing time table for selection of the guest faculty and thereafter, another Circular dated 09.02.2023 laying down the guidelines for selection of guest faculty for the academic year 2022-23. In the Circular dated 09.02.2023, it is submitted at Clause 5 that a specific direction was given that a selected guest faculty would be continued till the end of academic year in the respective universities or 10 months,

¶91

17 -

¶92

NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶93

whichever is earliest. It is contended that with the end of the academic year, the department issued notification dated 24.08.2023 laying down the tentative time table of guest faculty along with guidelines for selection process of guest faculty. It is claimed that as the academic year 2022-23 was coming to an end and academic year 2023-24 was beginning impeding undertaking of fresh selection process of guest faculty in Government colleges, the Government on 28.08.2023 gave permission to engage 11,100 guest faculty including librarians and physical education directors in Government First Grade Colleges including 3 Sanskrit and 2 Fine Arts Colleges. Pursuant there to, the department issued notification dated 13.09.2023 laying down the time table of guest faculty selections. The said notification was followed by issuance of Circular dated 06.10.2023 by which guidelines for undertaking the selection of guest faculty was laid down. Pursuant to the same, selection process was undertaken and 10365 guest faculty were selected amongst whom, 5271 possess UGC qualification of NET/KSET/Ph.D. The respondents contend that the impugned notification dated 24.08.2023 is not contrary to the UGC Regulations, 2018, as the guest faculty cannot be equated with

¶94

18 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶95

appointments made on contract basis as there is no contractual agreement between guest faculty and Government. It is contended that the guest faculty is appointed to discharge workload created due to increase in student strength. Hence, the number of guest faculty to be appointed is not constant, but is dynamic. It is contended that UGC Regulations, 2018 itself make a distinction between the contractual appointment and guest faculty in Regulation No.10. The respondents therefore, contend that granting benefit of past service and allowing the candidates time to procure prescribed qualification within 13.01.2025 is just and proper and therefore, does not call for any interference.

¶96

The learned Additional Government Advocate has reiterated the aforesaid contentions and claimed that continuation of Clause 6 of the Government Order dated 14.01.2022 was in the light of the order passed by this Court in W.P.No.3079/2022 and connected cases.

¶97

The learned counsel for respondent No.3 on the other hand contended that the UGC Regulations, 2018 prescribe a set of standards for the post of Assistant Professors and the

¶98

19 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶99

same is applicable even in respect of those candidates who desire to be contractual lecturers. He therefore, contends that there is no distinction between the contractual lecturer and regular lecturer in so far as it relates to minimum qualification that a candidate should possess. He therefore, contends that the prescription in the notification dated 24.08.2023 granting the benefit of past service, granting time till 13.01.2025 to acquire additional qualification, falls foul of the UGC Regulations, 2018.

¶100

During the pendency of the writ petition, the petitioners have filed I.A.No.2/2024 for a direction to the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to select only the candidates, who possess qualification in terms of the UGC Regulations, 2018 and the Guidelines bearing No.F.25-1/2018 (PS/Misc) for the academic year 2024-25 for the post of guest faculty in the colleges situate in the State of Karnataka.

¶101

The petitioners contend that respondent No.2 has now issued a Notification dated 30.08.2024 inviting applications for the post of Assistant Guest Lecturer for the academic year 2024-25 in various Government First Grade Colleges in the

¶102

20 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶103

State of Karnataka. It is contended that the applications were permitted to be filed online from 31.08.2024 and 07.09.2024 is the last date for filing applications and provisional selection list shall be announced on 08.09.2024. Facilities provided for editing applications is scheduled on 09.09.2024 and 10.09.2024 and publication of workload is scheduled on 11.09.2024 and final merit list followed by counseling is scheduled on 17.09.2024 onwards. He contends that this time too, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 have prescribed a Ph.D, NET, M.Phil apart from the Post Graduation qualification and has granted 3 marks for past service, upto 16 years and maximum marks of 48. He therefore, contends that this time too, the petitioners would not stand chance to seek recruitment as the candidates, who have put in years of service would march over the petitioners. Therefore, it is prayed that mistakes committed by the respondent Nos.1 and 2 in earlier round of recruitment be set at naught and suitable direction be issued to undertake recruitment process strictly in accordance with UGC Regulations, 2018.

¶104

This application is opposed by the learned Additional Government Advocate, who contends that criteria fixed under

¶105

21 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶106

the recruitment notification dated 30.08.2024 is similar to the one's that was followed in the year 2019. He contends that this Court had directed the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to consider the applicability of Clause 6 of the Government Order dated 14.01.2022 for the later years and therefore, same condition is followed till date. He contends that if this Court were to interfere with in the selection process at this stage, there is every likelihood of the Guest Lecturers, who have put in years of service be deprived of an opportunity to participate in the recruitment process. He therefore, prays that no orders be passed disturbing the status-quo.

¶107

I have considered the submissions made by the

¶108

learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Additional Government Advocate for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and the learned counsel for the respondent No.3.

¶109

A Coordinate Bench of this Court in W.P.No.3079/2022 and connected cases was considering the criteria fixed in the Government Order dated 14.01.2022 in so far as it enabled a candidate, who did not possess minimum education qualification to be appointed and provided him with

¶110

22 -

¶111

NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶112

an opportunity to secure such qualification within 3 years. It also was considering the question whether the candidate could be given weightage for the past service as a Guest Lecturer. This Court in terms of the order dated 11.01.2023 held,

¶113

"7. This Court is not persuaded by this argument to observe against the weightage that is contemplated in the impugned Circular dated 17.01.2022. The weightage is accorded to recognize experience as Guest Lecturers, and it is subject to the weightage being granted for a maximum period of 16 years at the rate of 3 [three] marks for every academic year. This weightage facilitates the settled proposition that one set of temporary employees must not be substituted by another set of employees. It is undisputed that each year notifications are issued calling for applications for appointment of Guest Lecturers, and after selection the candidates are appointed for that particular academic year with the process being repeated every next academic year. The method of according weightage to the past service as contemplated in the impugned stipulation in the Circular dated 17.01.2022 ensures that the salient rule as aforesaid has its play. Therefore, this Court is of the view that the method of granting weightage is reasonable, especially because it is subject to a maximum period

¶114

23 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶115

of 16 years at the rate of 3 [three] marks for every academic year and is applicable across the State."

¶116

While parting this Court held that Government should " consider continuing Clause 6 of the Government Order dated 14.01.2022 for the academic years hereafter in the light of the Regulation No.13 of the UGC Regulations, 2018." Therefore, in the teeth of the UGC Regulations, 2018, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 could not have perpetuated the mistake that this Court frowned upon in the order dated 11.01.2023. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner, the UGC which is the ultimate body which decides the minimum qualification for appointment of teachers and staff in University and Colleges, has prescribed minimum qualification as set out in paragraph No.4 above. There is no escape from the fact that the Regulation No.18 also prescribes that in respect of contractual lecturers also minimum qualification as prescribed above should be fulfilled. Therefore, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 could not have taken contrary view by misinterpreting the observation made by this Court in W.P.No.3079/2022 and connected cases. As a matter of fact, this Court cautioned the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to consider

¶117

24 -

¶118

NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶119

whether Clause No.6 in Government Order dated 14.01.2022 required to be continued for the subsequent years. The respondent Nos.1 and 2 have misconstrued the observations made by this Court and have construed that the Clause 6 in the Government Order dated 14.01.2022 must be continued for the later years and have provided an opportunity to those ineligible candidates to secure the required qualification within a period of 3 years or at least by 13.01.2025. This is a deliberate act on the part of the respondent Nos.1 and 2 and clearly falls foul of the UGC Regulations, 2018.

¶120

Therefore, if the appointment of the Guest Lecturer under the impugned Notification dated 24.08.2023 has come to an end and the impugned notification dated 30.08.2024 is to fill up the post of Guest Lecturer for the academic year 2024-25, it is appropriate to direct the respondent Nos.1 and 2 to ensure that only those who fulfill the minimum qualification as prescribed under the UGC Regulations, 2018, are selected. It is needless to mention that by virtue of the observation made by this Court in W.P.No.3079/2022 and connected cases, the weightage granted for a maximum period of 16 years at the

¶121

25 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶122

rate of 3 marks for every academic year is not disturbed. In that view of the matter, the following order is passed:

¶123

ORDER

¶124

i) This writ petition is allowed in part.

¶125

ii) The respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to ensure complete compliance of the minimum qualification as prescribed by the UGC/respondent No.3 under the UGC Regulations, 2018 before selecting any candidates for the post of Guest Lecturer.

¶126

iii) It is made clear that in view of the order passed in W.P.No.3079/2022 and connected cases, the marks prescribed for past service for a maximum period of 16 years at the rate of 3 marks shall continue to be applied.

¶127

iv) It is also made clear that the respondent Nos.1 and 2 shall not select any candidate who does not possess minimum qualification as prescribed in the UGC Regulations, 2018 and shall not select any candidate by placing a condition on him/her that

¶128

26 - NC: 2024:KHC:36459 WP No. 23600 of 2023

¶129

he/she shall obtain requisite qualification namely NET/SLET/SET before 13.01.2025, unless he/she is awarded with a doctorate or is registered for a doctoral program prior to July 2009.

¶130

In view of the disposal of the petition, pending I.As., if any, do not survive for consideration and the same stand disposed off.

¶131

Sd/(R. NATARAJ) JUDGE

¶132

PMR

¶133

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 10

Mr Sanjeevaiah H v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr Sanjeevaiah H v. the State of Karnataka

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri P Nagarajan Vs Union of India

Sri. Sunil Pattennavar Vs the Managing Director

Multi Pearl Apartment Owners Association Vs Sri Dwarakanath G

Shri. Rajesh. D Vs State of Karnataka

Shri T R Manjunath, Vs Bruhat Bengaluru Mahanagara Palike (Bbmp)

Smt Kruthika M v Vs the Commissioner