IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT WRIT PETITION NO.15958 OF 2016 & WRIT PETITION NOS.29356-60 OF 2016 (S-RES) BETWEEN 1. SMT. SHANTHA A.R, W/O PRABHAKAR B, AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT “SOUPARNIKA”, 1ST CROSS, VIDYANAGARA, SHIVAMOGGA – 577203.
2. SRI. SUMANTHRAPPA D.B, S/O BASAPPA K.D, AGED ABOUT 56 YEARS, RESIDING AT “MATHRUCHAYA”, SHIVABASAVANAGARA NAVULE, SHIVAMOGGA – 577201.
3. DR. B.H. SATYANARAYANA, S/O B.G. HAMPANNA, AGED 48 YEARS, SUJANA MAIN ROAD, SHANTAMMA LAYOUT SIDDESWARA NAGAR, SHIVAMOGGA – 517203.
4. SRI. H.A. SAYESWARA, S/O LATE H. ANANTHA SHETTY, AGED 50 YEARS, RESIDING AT RAVINDRA NAGAR, 6TH CROSS, SHIVAMOGGA – 577201.
5. S.A. SRIKANTA, S/O ANNAPPA GOWDA, AGED 51 YEARS, RESIDING AT SRIDEVIKRUPA NILAYA, MAIN ROAD, SHARAVATHI NAGAR, SHIVAMOGGA – 577201.
6. SRI. YUVARAJA T.C.M, S/O LATE C. MALLAPPA, AGED 46 YEARS, RESIDING AT GURUKRUPA, JYOTHI NAGAR, 1ST CROSS, M.R.S. CIRCLE, SHIVAMOGGA – 577203.
7. DR. PRASANNA KUMAR K, S/O LATE HALAPPA K, AGED 50 YEARS, NO.1, 41, JNANI, NEAR POLICE LAYOUT, SWAMY VIVEKANANDA EXTENSION, GADIKOPPA, SHIVAMOGGA – 577204.
8. SRI. K.M. MOHANESHA, S/O MALLAPPA, AGED 48 YEARS, 1ST B CROSS, SHREEKESHAVA NILAYA, VIDYANAGARA, SHIVAMOGGA – 577203.
9. SRI. RAVIKUMAR R, S/O RAMACHANDRAPPA H.M, AGED 55 YEARS, NO.18, SHREE MALVE, HONNALI ROAD, GONDICHATNAHALLI, SHIVAMOGGA – 577216.
10. SRI. N. NAGARAJA, S/O N.M. NEELAPPA, AGED 48 YEARS, DOOR NO 77, KSRTC LAYOUT, ALLOKOLA, SHIVAMOGGA. … PETITIONERS (BY SRI. V. LAKSHMINARAYANA, SENIOR COUNSEL FOR MS. ANUSHA L AND SRI. ASHWIN KUMAR.H, ADVOCATES) AND 1. THE REGISTRAR, KUVEMPU UNIVERSITY, SHANKARAGATTA, SHIVAMOGGA – 577451.
2. THE COORDINATOR, SCREENING COMMITTEE, KUVEMPU UNIVERSITY, SHANKARAGATTA, SHIVAMOGGA – 577451.
3. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, M.S. BUILDING, BANGALORE - 560001.
4. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, KUVEMPU UNIVERSITY, SHANKARAGATTA, SHIVAMOGGA – 577451. … RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. A.R. SHARADAMBA, HCGP FOR R3;
SRI. S.V. PRAKASH, ADVOCATE FOR R1, R2 & R4) THESE WRIT PETITIONS ARE FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 & 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENTS THAT PASSING OF ORIENTATION COURSE AND REFRESHER COURSE IN TERMS OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPOINTMENT WITHIN TWO YEARS AS PRESCRIBED BY THE U.G.C GOVERNMENT ORDER DTD:24.12.1998 (ANNEXURE-L) AS PER THE CLAUSE 11.3.0 IS SUFFICIENT COMPLIANCE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENTITLEMENT/PLACEMENT AS SENIOR/SELECTION GRADE, UNDER THE CAREER ADVANCEMENT SCHEME AND ETC.
THESE WRIT PETITIONS COMING ON FOR PRELIMINARY HEARING – B GROUP, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER The short grievance of the petitioners who are serving as Assistant Professors in UGC scales is against the respondent- University prescribing one more Orientation Course and Refresher Methodology Course as a sine qua non for earning the benefit of Career Advancement Scheme promulgated vide UGC Regulations dated 30.06.2010. After service of notice, the respondents having entered appearance through their counsel, resist the Writ Petition.
2. The subject regulations vide Appendix-III – Table: III, a copy whereof is produced by the respondent-University as an appendage to its affidavit dated 13.07.2019, reads as under:
APPENDIX-III – TABLE: III MINIMUM ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE AND SERVICE REQUIREMENTS FOR PROMOTION OF TEACHERS IN UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES S.No Promotion of Teachers through CAS 1 Assistant Professor/equivalent cadres from Stage 1 to Stage 2 Service requirement Assistant Professor in Stage 1 and completed four years of service with Ph.D. or five years of service who are with M.Phil/PG Degree in Professional Courses such as LLM, M.Tech, M.V.Sc., M.D., or six years of service who are without Ph.D/M.Phil/PG Degree in Professional Courses Minimum Academic Performance Requirements and Screening/Selection Criteria (i) Minimum API scores using PBAS scoring proforma developed by the concerned university as per the norms provided in Table II(A)/II(B) of Appendix III.
(ii) One Orientation and one Refresher/Research Methodology Course of 2/3 weeks duration.
(iii) Screening cum Verification process for recommending promotion.
3. The petitioners at Annexure – F series to their Writ Petitions have produced the certificates which prima facie show that they have accomplished the UGC sponsored Orientation Programme/Refresher Course, earlier which fact is not disputed by the other side. The subject Rule itself states “One orientation and one Refresher/Research Methodology Course”. No other Rule is brought to the notice of this court requiring the course being done repeatedly. A sample copy of one such certificate on record reads as under:
“UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION ACADEMIC STAFF COLLEGE UNIVERSITY OF KERALA UGC SPONSORED ORIENTATION PROGRAMME/REFRESHER COURSE C E R T I F I C A T E O F P A R T I C I P A T I O N This is to certify that Sri N.Nagaraja Lecturer, Department of Physics Sahyadri Science College, Shimoga, Karnataka has participated in the Orientation Programme in Multidisciplinary (IT oriented) from 13-05-2004 to 09-06-2004 and obtained Grade A.
Place: Kariavattam Date:09-06-2004 Course Co-ordinator Director Vice-Chancellor”
4. Going by the text and context of the subject Regulations which are promulgated under the provisions of the University Grants Commission Act, 1956, the certificates which the petitioners having secured after the course, have produced as above, satisfy the requirement of Rule in question banked upon by the respondent-University vehemently; the contention that such a course ought to have been accomplished after the petitioners were admitted to UGC Pay Scale cannot be countenanced in the teeth of the text of the Rule in question; if the Rule maker had such an intention, the language of the Rule would have been a bit different.
5. The provisions of Career Advancement Scheme need to be viewed liberally as contradistinguished from the scheme of a regular promotion in service jurisprudence. The CAS are time bound promotions, are intended to make the employee compete with himself rather than with colleagues; it is not dependent upon occurrence of vacancy; it is founded on the principle “all the rights accrue from a day well done”; such a scheme enables the employee to secure higher salary/recognition/position within the system while remaining routed to work in their respective discipline/field; Career Advancement Scheme links rights and responsibilities and instill the conviction in the employee that dedicated and efficient discharge of responsibilities alone would be the means of securing professional advancement vide Director General, Indian Council for Agricultural Research Vs. D.Sundara Raju, (2011) 6 SCC 605 Para 39.
6. The text of the subject rule does not admit an interpretation placed on it by the learned counsel for the respondent-University that the UGC sponsored Orientation Programme has to be accomplished time and again whenever the candidate stakes his claim under Career Advancement Scheme. Such an interpretation cannot be sustained without manhandling the text of the said rule which is extracted above, already; the said Rule needs to be construed in the light of the intent and content of the Career Advancement Scheme as described by the Apex Court in Sundara Raju Case supra.
In the above circumstances, these Writ Petitions succeed in part: the impugned orders at Annexure – M series which insist upon one more Orientation Programme are quashed; the candidature of the petitioners shall be considered for the benefit of CAS if they are otherwise eligible.
All contentions of the parties are kept open.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE cbc