Service law: Denial of the benefits of CAS to the respondent on the ground that her initial appointment as Lecturer in the School of Medical Education was not to a post that was duly sanctioned in terms of the Mahatma Gandhi University Statutes – Single Judge of High Court allowed writ petition filed by respondent by observing that the appointment of the respondent as Lecturer was after following selection procedure and that she was duly qualified and, thus, directed to count the past services of the respondent in the School of Medical Education in accordance with the UGC Regulations and to grant the benefit of CAS – Division Bench of the High Court upheld the order of Single Judge – Appeal by University – Held: Respondent was appointed as Lecturer in the regular pay-scale after inviting applications from qualified candidates – The said appointment was after obtaining appropriate approval from Director, School of Medical Education and sanction by the Vice-Chancellor and thereafter her probation was declared w.e.f. 03.10.1999 – Thereafter, she was appointed as Assistant Professor and thereafter as Associate Professor continuously in the regular pay-scale – It may be true that at the relevant time when she was appointed as Lecturer, the post was temporary but on that temporary post, her appointment was sanctioned by the Director as well as Vice-Chancellor – She has continuously worked right from 1998 (03.10.1998) – As per clause 10.1(f) with respect to grant of CAS, the previous appointment as ad hoc or temporary service of more than one year duration can be counted provided that : (i) the period of service was of more than one year duration; (ii) the incumbent was appointed on the recommendation of duly constituted Selection Committee; and (iii) the incumbent was selected to the permanent post in continuation to the ad hoc or temporary service, without any break – In that view of the matter, when respondent worked continuously right from 1998 initially as Lecturer, thereafter her probation was confirmed; thereafter she was appointed/promoted as Assistant Professor and thereafter again promoted to the post of Associate Professor on regular basis and on regular pay-scale, therefore, she shall be entitled to get her regular service counted for the period from 03.10.1998 to 21.10.2011 for the purpose of grant of the benefit of CAS – Interference with order of High Court not called for.
Dismissing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. Regulation 10.1 is required to be read as a whole. As per clause 10.1(f), the previous appointment as ad hoc or temporary service of more than one year duration can be counted provided that : (i) the period of service was of more than one year duration; (ii) the incumbent was appointed on the recommendation of duly constituted Selection Committee; and
(iii) the incumbent was selected to the permanent post in continuation to the ad hoc or temporary service, without any break. In that view of the matter, when the respondent worked continuously right from 1998 initially as Lecturer, thereafter her probation was confirmed; thereafter she was appointed/promoted as Assistant Professor and thereafter again promoted to the post of Associate Professor on regular basis and on regular pay-scale, therefore, the respondent shall be entitled to get her regular service counted for the period from 03.10.1998 to 21.10.2011 for the purpose of grant of the benefit of CAS. [Paras 6.2, 6.3][647H; 648-A-C]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.