Petitioners are Assistant Professors in various disciplines in the 4th respondent college. As per G.O.(P)No. 58/2010/H. Edn., dated 27/03/2010, the Government issued orders for implementing the directives in the 6th UGC scheme. Later, as per Ext.P2 order, the Government have issued a few clarifications to the original order dated 27/03/2010. As per Clause 3 of Ext.P2, teachers who have entered service on or after 01.09.2008 with a Ph.D acquired before 18.09.2010 shall be eligible for five non-compounded advance increments in the revised scale of pay at the revised rate of increment from the date of their entry in service, regardless of whether their Ph.D complies with the revised UGC Regulation 2009 for award of Ph.D. The grievance of the petitioners is that, even though they satisfy the eligibility criterion for claiming the five non-compounded advance increments provided for in the said clause of Exhibit P2 order, the Government is not extending the said benefits.
2. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners relied on Ext.P7 judgment of this Court and submitted that persons similarly placed have been directed to be given the non-compounded advance increments, provided for in the 5th UGC Scheme and pursuant to the said directions, petitioners in that case have been given the benefits. He has also relied on Ext.P8 order, by which an Assistant Professor working in Mercy College, Palakkad, was given the benefit of Ext.P2 order by the Deputy Director of Education, Thrissur. According to the learned counsel, in view of Exhibit P7 judgment and P8 order of the Deputy Director of Education, Thrissur, there is no justification for not extending the benefits of non-compound advance increments to the petitioners.
4. The learned Government Pleader, on the other hand, submitted that the petitioners would satisfy the eligibility criteria fixed in Exhibit P2 order for claiming the non-compounded advance increments. According to him, there is some confusion as to whether the petitioners, who do not have the NET qualification, are eligible for the said benefits, and the matter is being examined by the Government. However, he conceded that the teacher who was given the said benefit as per Ext.P8, does not have the NET qualification.
5. Ext.P2 confers a right on the petitioners to claim the five non-compounded advance increments provided therein. So long as the said order is in force, the Government is bound to implement the same. It is all the more so, when the benefits covered by the said order have been extended to similarly placed teachers .
6. In the circumstances, the second respondent is directed to extend the benefit of five non-compounded advance increments provided for in Exhibit P2 order to the petitioners, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
P.B.SURESH KUMAR, JUDGE smv