- (1.) The petitioners have assailed a reasoned order of the Director of Public Instruction dated December 26, 2014. By the reasoned order the Director of Public Instruction has rejected the claim of the petitioners under the Career and Advancement Scheme (CAS).
(2.) Learned Advocate for the petitioners has submitted that, the Government had introduced a new cadre of employees exclusively employed in laboratory work in Non-Government Colleges including sponsored Colleges in the name of Skilled Laboratory Worker (SLW). It has also prescribed a pay scale and the admissibility of an employee to such pay scale. He has referred to a Government Order March 17, 1994 with regard to the promotion. He has submitted that, although the 1994 Government Order prescribes tenure for promotion to persons in continuous service under the CAS, the petitioners have not been given the same. However, the petitioners were granted the benefit of CAS after completion of 20 years of service. The petitioners had approached the Writ Court earlier. The matter was referred to the Director of Public Instruction for consideration. By the impugned order the Director of Public Instructions has negated the claim of the petitioners. Learned Advocate for the petitioners has submitted that, the Director of Public Instructions has misconstrued and misapplied the provisions of the relevant Government Orders and, therefore, the impugned order is bad. Learned Advocate for the State has submitted that, the Government Order dated March 17, 1994 postulates CAS in the manner prescribed. He has submitted that, CAS to be granted to the petitioners would be after 20 years in terms of such Government Circulars and, therefore, there is not infirmity in the impugned order.
(3.) I have considered the rival contentions of the parties and the materials made available on record.;