- (1.) THE present writ petition has been filed for issuing a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to regularize the petitioners-lecturers in Government Degree Colleges/government Post Graduate Colleges of the State within a period to be specified by this Court in accordance with the U. P. Regularization of Ad hoc Appointments (On Posts within the purview of the U. P. Public Service Commission) Rules, 1979 as amended by Notification dated 20-12-2001. Further prayer is for issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to treat the petitioners as regular and permanent lecturers in Government Degree/post Graduate Degree Colleges in the State of U. P. w. e. f. 20-11-2001 or alternatively from 16-4-2004 with all consequential benefits.
(2.) THE facts are that the Government had issued a Government Order and a scheme for appointment of guest lecturers in the Government Degree/post Graduate Degree Colleges in the State against the fixed payment commuted per lecturer. Such scheme was envisaged in order to meet teaching requirement on account of non-availability of regularly selected teachers for such colleges from the U. P. Public Service Commission. Each of the petitioners was appointed as guest lecturer in pursuance of the Government Order dated 22-7-1986 on different dates. THE details regarding the initial date of appointment had been mentioned in para 22 of the writ petition. THE recruitment and qualification for such posts are governed by the Government Orders issued by the State Government from time to time. As the procedure for selection through Commission being a time consuming process, as such the Government had issued Government Order for appointment of the Lecturers for such colleges against a remuneration of Rs. 15/-per lecturer. Each of the petitioners is continuously functioning as lecturer since the aforesaid initial date of appointment and continuously discharging the teaching work in the different colleges though there exists no justification for referring the petitioners as guest lecturers and in making payment of salary commuted on normal rate per lecture. As the present petitioners were aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the respondents, they filed a writ petition before this Court numbered as Writ Petition No. 4812 of 1988. THE aforesaid writ petition was allowed by Division Bench of this Court-vide its judgment and order dated 10-10-1986. THE Government Order dated 22-10-1987 was quashed and a further direction was issued to the effect that the petitioners are entitled at least to the minimum of pay scale in the regular pay scale for lecturers teaching in Degree Colleges, i. e. , Rs. 2,200-4,000. A further direction was issued for considering the petitioners for regularization in accordance with the observations contained in the judgment and in accordance with law. Against the aforesaid order passed by this Court, a Special Leave Petition was filed before the Apex Court, which was also rejected. In compliance with the directions issued by this Court, the Government has issued an order sanctioning the payment of salary to the petitioners in accordance with the directions issued by the High Court that all such teachers be treated as ad hoc lecturers with effect from 10-10-1996. The affect of the aforesaid order was that the petitioners were treated as ad hoc lecturers with effect from 10-10-1996. The State Government has framed a rule known as U. P. Regularization of Ad hoc Appointment (On the posts within the purview of Public Service Commission) Rules, 1979, conferring entitlement of regularization upon ad hoc employees covered by the said rule. On 20-12- 2001 the State Government had issued a notification notifying the U. P. Regularization of Ad hoc Appointments (On the posts within the purview of Public Service Commission) (IIIrd amendment) Rules, 2001 whereby the benefit of Regularization has been extended to all ad hoc appointments made on or before 30-6-1998. In pursuance of the order dated 1-4-2004 the petitioners have been treated as Ad hoc Lecturers with effect from 10-10-1996 which is a date prior to 30-6-1998, as such, the petitioners also stand covered by the aforesaid notification but up till date none of the petitioners has been accorded any consideration for regularization in terms of the aforesaid notification. It has further been submitted that similarly situated employees who were also the petitioners in the writ petition mentioned above, on the basis of contempt application filed before the Lucknow Bench of this Court, the State Government had issued a notification dated 16-4-2004 regularizing 13 lecturers but the petitioners who were also in similar situation have not been accorded any consideration for regularization till date. The petitioners have been informed by the Directorate of Education that the petitioners have not been regularized on account of the objections regarding their qualification as they are not possessed with the minimum qualification specified as on date, as such they are not entitled for regularization.
(3.) IT has been submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the bare perusal of the Regularization Rules of 1979 as amended clearly demonstrates that it permits regularization of ad hoc appointees who possessed the requisite qualification at a time of initial appointment. The qualification, which has been prescribed subsequently, cannot be a basis for refusal. On 15-9-1986 the Director of Education issued a circular, which also specified the minimum qualification, required for the purpose of appointment as Lecturer. The Government has also issued a Government Order whereby 5% relaxation has been granted with regard to the academic qualification. As each of the petitioners possessed the requisite qualification as specified in the circular letter dated 15-6-1986 read with Government Order dated 30-3- 1989, which was the basis of appointment, granted to the petitioner, there cannot be any justification for raising any objection against the qualification possessed by the petitioners with regard to the qualification, which may exist on the date of appointment as Lecturer. The action of the respondents are arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior Advocate has submitted that as on the date when the petitioners were given appointment as guest lecturers, the qualification prescribed for the purpose of appointment, the petitioners were having the said qualification, therefore, if the qualification has been changed subsequently, that cannot be a basis for denial of the claim of the petitioners for regularization as the rule clearly provides that qualification at the time of initial date of appointment is to be seen. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has placed reliance upon Rule 8 of U. P. Higher Education (Group A) Service Rules, 1985 and has submitted that a candidate for direct recruitment to the post of lecturer must possess the qualification prescribed by the statute of the various State Universities governed by the U. P. State Universities Act, 1973. The learned Counsel for the petitioners has brought to the notice of the Court para 11. 13, which was inserted by the second amendment with effect from 20-6-1977, which provides regarding the qualification and appointment of teachers in the affiliated colleges of the first statute of Meerut University. The aforesaid provision is quoted below : "11. 13. (1) In the case of any college Affiliated to the University, the following shall be the minimum qualifications for the post of a Lecturer in the Faculties of Arts, Commerce and Science, namely : (a) a consistently good, academic record that is to say, the overall record of all assessments throughout the academic career of a candidate) with first or high second class (that is to say with an aggregate of more than 54 per cent marks) Master's degree in the subject concerned or equivalent degree of a foreign University in such subject; and (b) M. Phil. Degree or a recognized degree beyond the Master's level or published work indicating the capacity of a candidate for independent research work. (2) If a candidate possessing the qualification specified in sub-clause (b) of clause (1) is not available or is not considered suitable, the management of a college may, on the recommendation of the Selection Committee appoint a candidate possessing consistently good academic record on the condition that he will have to attain the qualifications referred to in that sub-clause within a period of five years from the date of his appointment : Provided that where the teacher so appointed fails to attain such qualification within the said period of five years, he shall not be entitled to yearly increments after such period, until he attains such qualification. (2-A) If a candidate has served as a teacher continuously for a period of not less than 5 years before 1st July, 1977 and has obtained an average of not less than 48 per cent marks in all examinations from High school to Master's degree, the Selection Committee may relax the requirement prescribed in clauses (1) and (2) : Provided that if a candidate holds Master's Degree in more subjects than one, then the marks obtained in the Master's Degree in the concerned subject alone shall be taken into account. (2-B) Notwithstanding anything contained in these Statutes if a candidate was selected by the selection committee constituted under clause (c) or clause (d) of sub-section (4) of Section 31 of the Act, and such selection is pending approval of the Vice-Chancellor since before August 1,1975 (the date of enforcement of statutes laying down revised qualifications of teachers of degree colleges, other than Principal), or April 20,1977 (the date of enforcement of Statues laying down revised qualifications of Principals of degree colleges), as the case may be, then the qualifications laid down in any statutes, Ordinances or Government Orders in force immediately before such date shall apply. (3) If a candidate holds a doctorate degree in the subject concerned the selection committee may relax any of the requirements in the clauses (1) and (2 ). Note. The original clause (3) was as follows : (3) If a candidate holds a doctorate degree in the Subject concerned the Selection Committee may relax the requirement relating to more than 54 per cent marks in the master's Degree. (4) In the case of any college affiliated to the University, the minimum qualification for the post of a Lecturer in the Faculty of Law shall be a degree in Master of Laws.;