INDERJIT KAUR Vs. PUNJABI UNIVERSITY, PATIALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER has filed this petition seeking a direction to the respondent to grant her grade of Rs. 2200 -4000 with effect from 24.6.1988 i.e. the date when she joined the respondent university on regular basis.

(2.) CASE of the petitioner, in brief, is that at the first instance, she joined the respondent university as a Library Assistant against a leave vacancy and worked as such from 30.8.1980 to 28.2.1981 and thereafter from 3.4.1981 to 28.7.1981 in the UGC pay scale of Rs. 300 -600. Post of Library Assistant was advertised in February 1981 by the respondent university. Petitioner appeared for the interview but the post was not filled up and petitioner was again appointed on adhoc basis with effect from 10.9.1982 to 9.3.1983. In January 1983, post of Library Assistant was advertised by the respondent university in the grade of Rs. 700 - 1200. Petitioner applied for the said post but no interview took place. Petitioner was again appointed on adhoc basis as Library Assistant in the scale of Rs. 700 -1200 on 3.1.1984. Thereafter, petitioner continued working with the respondent without any break till she was regularly appointed on 24.6.1988 vide appointment order Annexure P -3. Petitioner moved representation to the respondent university to grant her UGC scale admissible to the post of Library Assistant. Vide Annexure P -6, petitioner was granted UGC grade till she worked with the university on adhoc basis/against leave vacancy. However, after the petitioner was appointed on regular basis, she was denied the benefits of UGC pay scale. Hence, the present petition by the petitioner.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner has submitted that vide Annexure P -6, petitioner was granted UGC pay scale till she worked with the respondent university on adhoc basis/against leave vacancy. However, the university had without any cogent reason, denied the UGC pay scale to the petitioner after she was appointed on regular basis. Learned counsel has further submitted that as per Annexure P -8, UGC pay scale was liable to be granted to the employees who had acquired the qualifications prescribed by the University Grants Commission. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that petitioner had acquired the necessary qualifications as per University Grants Commission in August, 1991. In this regard, reliance has been placed on Detailed Marks Certificate (Annexure P -10). Learned counsel has also submitted that in any case petitioner was entitled to grant of UGC pay scale with effect from August 1991 when she had acquired the necessary qualifications. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner be granted the arrears from the date of filing of the writ petition.