R S MANE Vs. GOVERNMENT OF GOA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is directed against the judgment/decree dated 17/09/2005 of the learned Adhoc Additional District Judge in Civil Suit No.39/2004.

(2.) The plaintiff was appointed on adhoc basis as a lecturer in the Government Polytechnic at Panaji w.e.f. 17/12/1979 and was regularly appointed on officiating basis from 18/02/1988 and retired from 30/11/2001 at the age of 58. In the suit filed by him, the plaintiff claimed that he was entitled to the grant of 'senior scale' and 'selection scale'. The plaintiff was entitled for the grant of 'senior scale' from 17/12/1987 subject to the condition that he completed short term course of at least 8 weeks duration by December, 1994. The plaintiff has been granted senior scale from 17/12/1987 and he has also now been ordered to be paid arrears of his salary. This finding has been given by the learned Additional District Judge in the impugned judgment while answering issues nos.1 and 2. The Government has not assailed the said finding by filing cross objections or at the hearing of this appeal. On the contrary, Government has chosen to abide by the said finding.

(3.) The plaintiff was granted senior grade scale retrospectively by order dated 9/05/1994 w.e.f. 17/12/1987. The plaintiff claimed that he was entitled to be granted selection grade from 17/12/1996. According to the Government, the grant of selection grade to the plaintiff w.e.f. 17/12/1996 was deferred since the Review Committee in its meeting held on 4/09/1998 and 3/04/2000 had held that the plaintiff did not fulfill one of the conditions led down by the AICTE for the consideration of career advancement i.e. consistently good performance appraisal report. The Government had laid down the condition that a lecturer should earn at least four "very good ACR's" for selection grade, as laid down in circular dated 15/12/1998. The plaintiff was required to earn four "very good ACR's" and since the plaintiff did not earn four "very good ACR's" and further did not complete 8 weeks refresher course therein and since the plaintiff's promotion for one year was held up due to disciplinary proceedings against him, the plaintiff was not marked for selection grade as he was ineligible for the same.