- (1.) R. A. Sharma, J. Whether Professors promoted under Merit promo tion Scheme (hereinafter referred to as PPS professors) are entitled to the same pay scale which is given to the Professor appointed against the approved' posts through open selection (hereinafter referred to as the direct Professors), is the only quest ion. involved in this writ petition.
(2.) BY two orders dated 25-5-1984 and 31-5-1994 the Government of U. P. sanctioned Merit Promotion Scheme (commonly kmwn as Personal Promotion Scheme hereinafter referred as PPS), providing for merit promotions to the Readers and Lecturers of the Roorkes University (here inafter referred to as the University), to the posts of Professors and Readers respectively. Upto 31-12-1985 hot the categories of Professors and Readers were given the same pay-scale. BY order dated 17-10-1990 the Government revised the pay-scale of the teachers of the University with effect from 1-1-1986. BY that order two nay- scale were laid down for the two categories of Professors, although the same pay scale was fixed for both the catagories of Readers, fixed by the above Government order, are as follows : Post Existing pay scale Revised pay scale by G. O. dated (prior to 1-1-1986) 17-10-1990 w. e. f. 1-1-1986. Reader-Direct Rs. 1200-1900 Rs. 3700-5700 Reader under Rs. do -do - PPs Professor Rs. 1500-2500 Rs. 5100-7300 (Direct) Professor Rs. do Rs. 4500-5700 (under PPS) Twelve PPS Professors challenged the above order of the Government by means of Writ Petition No. 30092 of 1990. The Vice-Chancellor of the University also vide letter dated 23-4-1991 requested the Government to grant the same pay scale to both catagories of the Professors. During the pendency of the above writ petition Government of U. P. by order dated 21-1-1992 sanctioned the pay-scale of Rs. 5100-7300 for those PPS Professors also who were promoted before 19-4-1990. Petitioners who filed the afore said writ petition No. 30092 of 1990 were the Professors who were appoint ed before 19-4- 1990 and they thus became entitled to the same pay scale of Rs. 5100-7300 which was sanctioned for the direct Professors. They, there fore, withdrew their writ petition, Twenty PPS Professors (petitioner) who were promoted after 19-4-1990, filed representations before the Chancellor of the University as the State Government against the aforesaid two Govern ment orders dated 17-10-1990 and 21-1-1992. There being no response from them the petitioners filed this writ petition against those orders praying for writ of mandamus directing the respondents not to make any discrimination in the pay-scale between the direct and PPS Professors. Further prayer for writ of mandamus directing the respondents to pay them the same pay scale which is being paid to the direct Professors, has also been made. Incidental and consequential reliefs in connection therewith including the relief for arrears, is also claimed. The University has filed counter-affidavit and the petitioners have filed rejoinder-affidavit in reply thereto. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Personal Promotion Scheme was sanctioned by the Government so as to remove the stagnation amongst the teachers of the University and to provide incentives to them. Promotion under this scheme is not as a matter of course. Only those Readers are promoted under this Scheme who have eligibility qualifications and have been selected by a Selection Committee. PPS Professors perform the same duties which are performed by the Direct Professors. Details of the duties and functions which are discharged/performed by both the catagories of Professors have been gives in Paragraphs 20 and 21 of the writ petition, which have not been disputed.
(3.) IN the State of Rajasthan also different pay scales were prescribed with effect from 1-1-1986 for the two categories of Professors. This was challenged before Rajasthan High Court by means of writ petition. The High Court allowed those writ petitions and quashed the Government order holding that both categories of Professors are similarly situated with regard to their status, designation, nature, quality ami quantity of work and, therefore, both of them are entitled o the same pay scale. It was accordingly held that it was not open to the State to make discrimination between the two categories of Professors in the matter of pay scale. Against the above judgment of Rajasthan High Court Special Leave Petition was filed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court which was dismissed on 9-12-1988. In Dr. Rashmi Srivastava v. Vikram University, (1995)3 SCC 653, the Supreme Court held that PPS Professors are the ex-cadre employees of the University who cannot claim any inter se seniority with the direct recruits forming regular cadre. Although the Supreme Court in the above case held that PPS teachers cannot be included in the seniority list of the cadre teachers but it has specifically observed that it cannot be assumed that merit promotions are of no legal effect and accordingly it was laid down that excepting for the purposes of seniority, for all other purposes like pay, work and status PPS Professors and Readers are the Professor and Readers of the University. Relevant extract from paragraph 44 of the said decision of Supreme Court, is reproduced below : "but it must be clarified at this stage that even though they may not be included in the seniority list of cadre employees, namely. Professors or Readers it also cannot be held as assumed by the High Court that their merit promo tions were of no legal effect at all. In this connection, we must keep in view the salient features of the merit promotion scheme. It cannot be disputed that with a view to avoid stagnation amongst University teachers the Commission recommended a scheme of merit promotion. The very preamble of the Scheme shows that it is necessary to give reasonable opportunity for career advancement and recognition of merit and it is on the basis of completive test for recognising outstand ing work and merit that such merit promotions were given. Once a Lecturer is promoted on merit as Reader or a Reader as Professor even though the Promotion may be persona! to him he can certainly continues to work as promotee Reader or professor till he retires or otherwise ceases to be an employee of the University or till he is reverted for some valid reasons. There is no question of such a merit promotee being revarted otherwise to the lower cadre from which he came. Ha has to work as a Reader or Professors as the case may be and share the workload with the cadre employees. In fact as there is no vacancy created in the lower cadre from which he came on account of his promotion, he has also to share the burden of workload of the lower post. Consequently, it cannot be said that such a merit promotee is not the Reader or Professor so far as his work as Reader or Professor is concerned. He cannot claim to be fitted in the inter se seniority list and may remain outside the cadre of Reader or Professor as the case may be. However, for all other purposes like pay, work and status, he is a Reader or Professor as the case may be. (Emphasis supplied ).;