PROF. MAN MOHAN SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA
HIGH COURT OF MEGHALAYA
Prof. Man Mohan Singh
UNION OF INDIA
Click here to view full judgement.
BISWANATH SOMADDER,CJ. -
(1.) This instant appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 4th June, 2014 passed in WP(C) No. 245 of 2012. The case of the writ appellant (writ petitioner) ' who has since retired ' is that he was directly appointed as a Professor from 12.07.1991 in the North Eastern Hill University, Shillong. His grievances as put forth, centre around two aspects:- (i) First, that the respondent University had not implemented the Scheme of Revision of Pay in accordance with the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission, and had acted contrary to MHRD letter dated 31.12.2008 which was approved by the Ministry of Finance vide memorandum dated 30.08.2008 as also the CCS (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 and (ii) secondly, the denial of three increments meant for PhD holders, a type of incentive for higher qualification. By the impugned order, the said writ petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge, who observed that the writ appellant had utterly failed to make out any case.
(2.) Mr. V.K. Jindal, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. E. Marwein, learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant, being a directly recruited professor, his pay falls under the category of (XIV) of clause 2A of the recommendation of the Government of India dated 31.12.2008 under the caption, 'the pay structure for different categories of teachers and equivalent position shall be as indicated below (a) Assistant Professor/Associate Professor/Professor in Colleges and Universities'. Learned senior counsel submits that as per the said clause of the recommendation, the pay of a directly recruited professor should have been fixed not below Rs. 43,000/- in the Pay Band of Rs. 37,400-67,000/- with Academic Grade Pay (AGP) of Rs 10,000/-. It is further submitted that the respondent University downgraded and reduced the Basic Pay of the appellant from Rs. 51,850/- to 48,870/- with retrospective effect from 01.01.2006, vide the impugned order dated 04.12.2009, in utter violation of the recommendation of the 6th Pay Commission. Learned senior counsel has also contended that the revised pay fixation of the incumbent Professors by the use of fitment table is arbitrary, inasmuch as, per the 6th Central Pay Commission, the pay of a directly recruited professor should be fixed on the level not below Rs. 43,000/- in the Pay Band of 37,400-67,000/- with AGP of Rs. 10,000/-.
(3.) The learned Senior counsel submits that the appellant has also been wrongly denied three advance increments, due as an incentive to teachers possessing a PhD degree, in terms of order dated 31.12.2008 issued by the Ministry of HRD and UGC Regulation dated 30.06.2010 (Annexure P/5). In assailing the order of the learned Single Judge, learned senior counsel reiterates his submissions that the respondent University failed to implement the recommendation of the 6th Pay Commission pursuant to the MHRD letter dated 31.12.2008, and further that the directions of the Ministry of Finance, dated 30.08.2008, CCS (Revised Pay) Rules issued by the Ministry of Personnel etc. dated 13.09.2008, which were communicated to the UGC vide Memo dated 31.12.2008, were totally ignored by the learned Single Judge. As such, he submits that the impugned judgment and order be set aside and quashed and the reliefs as prayed in the writ petition be allowed.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.