- (1.) HEARD counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE simple grievance in the present writ application raised by the petitioner is that the respondent State and the University have refused to grant annual increments due to him on the revised UGC scale on the ground that he does not hold the Ph.D. Degree. According to the petitioner, he had been promoted to the post of Reader under the time bound scheme by a notification dated 21st November 1998 with effect from 01st February 1985. He was in the pre -revised pay scale of Rs. 12,000 -18,300, which has of course now been revised to Rs. 37,400 -67,000, but the annual increments on the revised scale are being denied. The basis for denial of such increments are the resolution / letter dated 13th November 2001 issued by the Directorate of Higher Education, Human Resources Development Department, Government of Jharkhand, which is annexed as Annexure -B to the counter affidavit. The said letter has been issued by the respondent Department on acceptance of the UGC package for revision of the pay scales, minimum qualification for appointment, other service conditions of University and College Teachers as a measure for the improvement as well as maintenance of standards in higher education. The said package is annexed as Annexure -A to the counter affidavit. In Clause -7 (A) (ii) of the said UGC Package (Annexure -A), a condition has been laid down that for movement into grades of Readers and above, the minimum eligibility criteria would be Ph.D. Those without Ph.D can go up to the level of Lecturer (Selection Grade). The State Respondents relied upon the said condition which has also been incorporated at Para -12 of the resolution / letter dated 13th November 2001. The present petitioner has been granted the UGC scale which has been implemented with effect from 01st January 1996 in the scale of 12,000 -18,300, thereafter revised to 37,400 -67,000. The present petitioner is said to have retired on 31st July 2012 on the post of Reader from Jagannathpur College under Ranchi University.
(3.) COUNSEL for the petitioner submits that such a ground cannot be made to deny the annual increments due on the revised UGC scale to the petitioner who has been serving as a Reader with effect from 01st February 1985 by virtue of Notification of the University issued on 21st November 1998. He further submits that the University Statute known as "General Conditions of Service of Employees of the Patna, Bihar, Ranchi, Bhagalpur, Magadh, L.N. Mithila and K.S.D. Sanskrit Universities, which was approved by the Chancellor on 20th September 1980 vide letter no. BSU -36/80 -5270 GS(1) dated 18th November 1980, lays down that an increment shall ordinarily be drawn by the University Servant as a matter of course, unless it is withheld by the authority empowered to appoint him, as a measure of punishment. He submits that the similar issue was under consideration earlier before the learned Single Judge of this Court in the case of Rajeshwar Pd. Verma, etc. versus Vinoba Bhave University and Ors in which reliance upon the same notification dated 13th November 2001 to deny the annual increments was placed which was disapproved by this Court in its judgment dated 22nd May 2009 reported in [2009 (3) J C R 666 (jhr)]. He also submits that the similar view has been reiterated in the judgment dated 04th July 2013 rendered by another Single Bench of this Court in WPS No. 3632/2011 in the case of V.N. Jha @ Viveka Nand Jha and Ors versus State of Jharkhand and Ors. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that these arguments were made before the learned Single Judge. While quashing the notification, learned Single Judge observed that imposing such a condition to withhold the annual increments is arbitrary, discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.;