IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 12TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 PRESENT THE HON’BLE MR.L.NARAYANA SWAMY ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE AND THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR WRIT APPEAL No.464/2016 (S-RES) BETWEEN:
SRI. N. VIJAYA DHWAJA AGED ABOUT 66 YEARS NO.52, 14TH MAIN, RAGHAVENDRA BLOCK SRINAGARA, BANGALORE-560 050 ... APPELLANT (BY SHRI. N. VIJAYA DHWAJA, PARTY-IN-PERSON) AND:
1. THE DIRECTOR, D.S.E.R.T. REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION SHESHADRI ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION REPRESENTED BY THE COMMISSIONER DEPARTMENT OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION SHESHARI ROAD, BANGALORE-560 001 3. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY HIGHER EDUCATION SECRETARY (UNIVERSITIES) M.S.BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001 ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. R. ANITHA, HCGP) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 4 OF THE KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED IN THE WRIT PETITION 87/16 DATED 02.02.2016.
THIS WRIT APPEAL, HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED FOR JUDGMENT ON 20.02.2019, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF JUDGMENT, THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR J, PRONOUNCED THE FOLLOWING:-
J U D G M E N T Heard Shri N.Vijaya Dhwaja, appellant party-in-person and Ms.R.Anitha, learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondents.
2. For the sake of convenience, parties are referred to as per their status in the writ petition.
3. Petitioner was appointed as a Lecturer against a sanctioned post in Vijaya Teachers College, Bengaluru on 01.06.1994 and he reported for duty on 01.07.1994. The State Government extended UGC pay scale to Lecturers working in aided Institutions. Petitioner was denied of the said benefit without any reason. He submitted various representations to respondents seeking UGC pay scale. They were not considered. He was also denied promotion to the post of Reader on the ground that as per existing rules, there was no provision to promote Lecturers working in the ‘State Scale’ of salary as mentioned in the endorsement dated 07.08.2004 issued by the Directorate of State Education Research and Training (‘DSERT’ for short). Petitioner challenged the said endorsement in W.P.No.13641/2007 and it was disposed of on October 31, 2012 with a direction to the State Government to consider petitioner’s length of service as Lecturer, for promotion in accordance with law within two months there from. Feeling aggrieved, petitioner challenged the said order in W.A. No.977/2014 and the same was disposed of on November 20, 2015 reserving liberty to the petitioner to challenge endorsement dated November 6, 2015, which the State Government had relied upon to contend that petitioner was not entitled for any career advancement. Therefore, petitioner presented the instant writ petition praying inter alia for a direction to the State Government to comply with order dated October 31, 2012. Hon’ble Single Judge by the impugned order has dismissed the instant writ petition. Hence, this writ appeal.
4. Shri.Vijaya Dhwaja – party-in-person urged following contentions:
that the State Government have grossly discriminated his case in depriving UGC pay scale and not promoting him, whereas Lecturers appointed in similar aided colleges, have been given those benefits;
that the State Government have taken highly illegal stand for not extending the UGC pay scale contrary to UGC Regulations and the communications issued from the University Grants Commission from time to time;
that before the Hon’ble Single Judge, State Government took a stand that petitioner had not passed the Orientation Course. However, as per communication dated June 21, 2006, UGC, had resolved to exempt eligible Teachers for the purpose of promotion under the Career Advancement Scheme up to December 31, 2006;
that State Government have conceded before a coordinate Division Bench of this Court that petitioner is entitled for UGC pay scale with effect from July 01, 1994 as recorded in order dated September 21, 2015 in W.A. No. 977/2014;
that in the Government Order No.ED 188 DCE 99, Bangalore dated November 15, 1999 with regard to orientation course, it is stated that promotions shall not be held up.
With the above submissions petitioner prayed for allowing this appeal.
5. Smt.R.Anitha, learned HCGP argued in support of the impugned order and prayed for dismissal of this appeal. She contended that petitioner has been given the benefit of UGC scale on November 17, 2015. However, benefit of career advancement cannot be extended to him as he did not pass the orientation course.
6. We have carefully considered rival contentions and perused the records.
7. In substance, petitioner has two grievances. Firstly, that UGC pay scale has not been extended to him. Secondly that he was not given any promotion.
8. Indubitable facts of the case are, petitioner was appointed on June 1, 1994 and he reported for duty on July 1, 1994. His post was approved on June 29, 1994. On attaining the age of superannuation, he retired on September 30, 2007. Although he has been pleading with the State Government to extend the UGC pay scale, unfortunately, on one pretext or the other, the State Government kept denying the said benefit and finally extended UGC pay scale in 2015. Therefore, only the grievance with regard to promotion survives for consideration.
9. Records disclose that a proposal to promote petitioner was submitted by the college on 26.04.2004. On 07.08.2004, the DSERT issued an endorsement stating that there was no provision to promote a Lecturer who was on State pay scale.
10. Petitioner approached this Court in Writ Petition No.13641/2007, and it was disposed of with a direction to consider petitioner’s case for promotion. Petitioner challenged the said order in writ appeal No.977/2014. We note with regret that having denied the benefit of UGC pay scale throughout his career, State have conceded before this Court in W.A. No.977/2014 that petitioner was indeed entitled for UGC pay scale. The relevant portion of the order dated September 21, 2015 reads thus:
“Mr.N.Vijaya Dhwaja, the writ petitioner in person, was a Lecturer in Education in Vijaya Teachers’ College. He has filed this writ petition as he was not paid his remuneration in terms of the University Grants Commission pay scale from July 1, 1994.
Miss Niloufer Akbar, learned Additional Government Advocate, appears and submits, on instructions, that the writ petitioner is entitled to University Grants Commission scale. However, she submits that the payment could not be released to him as the college has not supplied certain particulars.”
11. Having conceded before a Division Bench of this Court in September, 2015, the Commissioner of Collegiate Education, as per letter dated November 6, 2015 has stated that it was not possible to accord the proposed sanction to the placement in selection scale as petitioner had not undergone orientation course.
12. As per the Government order No. ED 188 DCE 99, Bangalore dated 15.11.1999 (‘G.O. dated 15.11.1999’ for short), promotion could not have been held up for want of completion of orientation course. The relevant portion of the said Government Order reads as follows:
“16. Orientation and Refresher Courses:
(a) The requirement of participation in orientation/refresher courses/summer institutes, each of at least three to four weeks duration, and consistently satisfactory performance appraisal reports, shall be a mandatory requirement for career advancement from lecturer to lecturer (senior scale) and from lecturer (senior scale) to lecturer (selection grade). Wherever the requirement of orientation/refresher courses has remained incomplete, promotions would not be held up but these must be completed by the year 2000 (31-12- 2000).”
(Emphasis supplied) 13. The University Grant Commission by a communication dated June 21, 2006 has conveyed to the Educational Secretaries of all State Governments as follows:
“This was examined. The Commission decided that this exemption may be extended upto the period 31.12.2006 both for teachers and Assistant Registrars.”
14. Further, the Government Order dated 15.11.1999 enjoins Department of Collegiate Education to devise a mechanism to ensure that the College Principals sponsor the Teachers for required orientation and refresher courses. The relevant portion of the order reads as follows:
“19. Deputation to Orientation and Refresher Courses:
(a) The Department of Collegiate Education may devise a mechanism for ensuring that the college Principals sponsor the teachers for the required orientation and refresher course. Such opportunity shall not be denied ordinarily to the teachers except on sufficient grounds.”
15. Thus, indisputably, the Government Order dated 15.11.1999 is in the form of a comprehensive guideline with regard to appointment, career advancement and orientation courses.
16. The DSERT, in its communication dated August 7, 2004, took an erroneous stand that petitioner was not entitled for promotion. We say so because the said endorsement was apparently based on an incorrect premise that petitioner was drawing State pay scale, whereas, the State Government have conceded before this Court that petitioner was entitled for UGC pay scale right from the date of his appointment.
17. Further, no records are produced nor any averment made on behalf of the State to suggest that Directorate of Collegiate Education acted in furtherance of Clause 19 of the Government Order dated 15.11.1999 and called upon the petitioner to undergo the orientation course. Therefore, the State Government, having failed in their duty and taken inconsistent stands throughout cannot be heard to contend that petitioner was denied promotion for want of completion of orientation course as stated in endorsement dated November 6, 2015.
18. It is heartening to note that the Bangalore University has certified that petitioner has delivered lecture on the topic ‘Teaching Skills’ as a Resource Person to participants of 58th Orientation Programme organized by UGC. The Certificate reads thus:
“This is to certify that Prof. N.Vijaya Dhwaja (Rtd.) Vijaya Teachers College, Bengaluru has delivered a lecture on the topic entitled “Teaching Skills” as a Resource Person to the participants of 58th Orientation Programme organized by UGC. Human Resource Development Centre, Bangalore University, Jnana Bharathi Campus, Bengaluru on 10th December, 2018. The participants of the said course have appreciated his lecture.”
19. We note with regret that here is a Teacher who is invited as a Resource Person by the UGC to deliver Lectures in Orientation programmes, whereas the State Government have treated him with scant respect compelling him to approach this Court repeatedly since 2007.
20. A combined reading of the Government Order dated 15.11.1999, the communication by the UGC dated June 21, 2006 and the specific stand taken by the State Government before this Court that petitioner was entitled for UGC pay scale with effect from July 1, 1994 (In W.A.No.977/2014), leads us to an irresistible inference that State Government which are expected to be a model employer have meted out gross injustice to the petitioner.
21. After parents, the Teachers find the third most reverential position in India as per mythology. It is regrettable that due to the callous and lackadaisical attitude of the State Government, a Teacher who joined service in the year 1994 has been deprived of his eligible UGC pay scale throughout his career. He has been driven from pillar to post and compelled to knock the doors of this Court on several occasions.
22. In the light of the above discussion, we are of the considered view that this appeal eminently deserves to be allowed. Hence, the following:
ORDER (i) Writ appeal is allowed with costs, quantified at Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) payable by 2nd and 3rd respondents;
(ii) Order dated February 2, 2016 in W.P. No.87/2016 passed by the Hon’ble Single Judge is set-aside;
(iii) Endorsement No.PÁ E/38/¨ÉA¸ÁÜ/2015-16/§¸ÁÜ« dated November 6, 2015 issued by the Commissioner of Collegiate Education is quashed;
(iv) Respondents are directed to grant notional promotions in furtherance of career advancement as per Government Order dated 15.11.1999 without insisting on the orientation course and to fix pay scale applicable to the promoted posts, calculate the complete financial benefit and pay the same to the petitioner with 8% simple interest;
(v) In view of long pendency of litigation, we direct strict compliance of this order within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Sd/-
ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/- JUDGE SPS