✦ High Court of India · 27 Mar 2025

BY ADVS. SRI v. VENUGOPAL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. S. KRISHNAMOORTHY, STANDING COUNSEL THIS

Case Details High Court of India · 27 Mar 2025
Court
High Court of India
Decided
27 Mar 2025
Bench
N NAGARESH
Length
1,390 words

BY ADVS. SRI. V. VENUGOPAL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. S. KRISHNAMOORTHY, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 3 JUDGMENT Dated this the 27th day of March, 2025 The petitioner was an Associate Professor in the Department of English of Sacred Heart College, Thevara. The petitioner is aggrieved by Exts.P4, P17 and P19 orders of the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education denying his request for stepping up his Basic Pay on par with his junior in the College in the Department of English and accordingly, refix his pensionary benefits, in the light of the dictum of this Court in Ext.P9 judgment and Ext.P11 Government Order.

2. The 6th UGC Pay Revision Scheme was implemented in the State with effect from 01.01.2006 and Teachers who acquired Ph.D Degree after 01.09.2008, were granted three non-compounded advance increments on their revised Basic Pay while the Teachers who had acquired Ph.D WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 4 Degree before 01.09.2008 were sanctioned only two non- compounded advance increments on their prerevised Basic Pay, in accordance with the 5th UGC Pay Revision Scheme.

3. On fixation of Basic Pay in the revised scale in accordance with the 6th Pay Revision Scheme, pay of a Teacher two year junior in service to the petitioner and who had acquired his Ph.D. Degree only on 15.05.2009 as against the Ph.D. Degree of the petitioner on 26.02.2005, was fixed nearly ₹2000/- Basic Pay more than the petitioner.

4. A Division Bench of this Court in similar cases as per Ext.P9 judgment found that the 6th UGC Pay Scheme conferred a substantial advantage in the matter of computing the pay of persons who have acquired Ph.D after

01.09.2008 and that they have been drawing more salary than their seniors. It was held that there is no justification for classifying them into persons who have acquired Ph.D before WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 5

01.09.2008 and subsequent to the said date, for the purpose of conferring a career advancement increment and that implementation of the Scheme shall not result in a situation where the juniors are permitted to draw more salary than their seniors. Accordingly, the pay of the seniors were directed to be stepped up to that of their juniors. Even though the Government filed SLP (C) before the Hon’ble Apex Court, it was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a Review Petition before this Court.

5. Accordingly, the Government R.P. No.228/2018 in W.A. No.488/2017 and it was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court as per Ext.P10 judgment. The Government in accordance with the above judgments passed Ext.P11 Government Order ordering the Director of Collegiate Education to correct the anomalous situation which has arisen as a result of the implementation of 6th Pay WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 6 Revision Scheme wherein juniors are drawing a higher pay than their seniors and to step up the pay of seniors to be at par with the pay of their juniors. On 19.06.2019, the Government as per Ext.P12 clarified that Ext.P11 order is applicable to all similarly placed teachers in the State and that senior junior anomaly has to be rectified in respect of Teachers in the same Department of the same College.

6. However, when the proposal for stepping up the pay of the petitioner was placed by the Principal of the College before the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education, it was rejected stating that he could not extent the benefits of Ext.P11 to the petitioner without any formal orders from this Court and also by incorrectly stating that there are no anomalies in the case of the petitioner. Even though Ext.P21 representation was submitted by the petitioner before the Principal Secretary, Higher Education on 15.11.2024, no WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 7 orders till date is passed by him. Hence the petitioner is before this Court.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 4.

8. As against Exts.P4 and P19, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P21 representation before 2nd respondent. The contention of the petitioner is that Ext.P19 order was passed without considering the law laid down by this Court in Exts.P8 to P10 judgments, Ext.P11 Government Order and clarification given by the 2nd respondent.

9. Considering the above facts, I am of the view that the 2nd respondent can consider the grievance raised by the petitioner in Ext.P21 and take appropriate decision thereon expeditiously in the light of the law laid down by this WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 8 Court. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P21 representation adverting to Exts.P8 to P10 judgments, Ext.P11 Government Order and Ext.P12 clarification also. Orders shall be passed within a period of four months. Sd/- N.NAGARESH JUDGE WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 9 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12544/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 Exhibit P2 Exhibit P3 Exhibit P4 Exhibit P5 Exhibit P6 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE PH.D. DEGREE CERTIFICATE DATED 29.06.2005 ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT A PHOTOCOPY OF THE 6TH UGC PAY REVISION SCHEME NOTIFIED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, RESOURCE MINISTRY DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA DATED 31.12.2008 HUMAN OF PHOTOCOPY A (P) NO.58/2010/H.EDN. DATED 27.03.2010 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT G.O OF A PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.D2/2459/2022/DCEDDEKM OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 29.06.2022 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER OF THE MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCES (DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION) DATED 27.07.1998 TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT INTIMATING THE 5TH UGC PAY REVISION SCHEME A PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER OF THE MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCES (DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION) DATED 27.07.1998 TO THE EDUCATION SECRETARIES OF ALL STATES/UNION TERRITORIES WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 Exhibit P7 Exhibit P8 Exhibit P9 10 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE G.O (P) NO.171/99/H.EDN. DATED 21.12.1999 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON’BLE COURT IN DR.BEENA T. ABRAHAM & ORS .V. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS W.P (C) NO. 32933/2014 DATED 28.10.2016 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THIS HON’BLE COURT IN GOVERNMENT OF KERALA .V. DR.BEENA T.ABRAHAM & ORS W.A.NO.488/2017 DATED 06.06.2017 Exhibit P10 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN R.P NO.228/ 2018 IN W.A.NO.488/2017 DATED 13.06.2018 Exhibit P11 A PHOTOCOPY OF G.O (RT) NO.1691/2018/HEDN DATED 11.09.2018 Exhibit P12 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER NO. D1/375/2017/HEDN ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19.06.2019 Exhibit P13 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE G.O (MS) NO.210/2022/ FIN DATED 03.12.2022 Exhibit P14 Exhibit P15 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 30.05.2023 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15.01.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 6TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P16 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29.01.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 Exhibit P17 Exhibit P18 Exhibit P19 Exhibit P20 11 TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT A PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT DATED 15.04.2024 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPLY OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 16.05.2024 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.D2/2459/2022/DCEDDEKM OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 12.06.2024 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE PAY AND ALLOWANCE OF TEACHERS OF THE COLLEGE ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT FOR APRIL 2020 Exhibit P21 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.11.2024

BY ADVS. SRI. V. VENUGOPAL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. S. KRISHNAMOORTHY, STANDING COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27.03.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 3 JUDGMENT Dated this the 27th day of March, 2025 The petitioner was an Associate Professor in the Department of English of Sacred Heart College, Thevara. The petitioner is aggrieved by Exts.P4, P17 and P19 orders of the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education denying his request for stepping up his Basic Pay on par with his junior in the College in the Department of English and accordingly, refix his pensionary benefits, in the light of the dictum of this Court in Ext.P9 judgment and Ext.P11 Government Order.

2. The 6th UGC Pay Revision Scheme was implemented in the State with effect from 01.01.2006 and Teachers who acquired Ph.D Degree after 01.09.2008, were granted three non-compounded advance increments on their revised Basic Pay while the Teachers who had acquired Ph.D WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 4 Degree before 01.09.2008 were sanctioned only two non- compounded advance increments on their prerevised Basic Pay, in accordance with the 5th UGC Pay Revision Scheme.

3. On fixation of Basic Pay in the revised scale in accordance with the 6th Pay Revision Scheme, pay of a Teacher two year junior in service to the petitioner and who had acquired his Ph.D. Degree only on 15.05.2009 as against the Ph.D. Degree of the petitioner on 26.02.2005, was fixed nearly ₹2000/- Basic Pay more than the petitioner.

4. A Division Bench of this Court in similar cases as per Ext.P9 judgment found that the 6th UGC Pay Scheme conferred a substantial advantage in the matter of computing the pay of persons who have acquired Ph.D after

01.09.2008 and that they have been drawing more salary than their seniors. It was held that there is no justification for classifying them into persons who have acquired Ph.D before WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 5

01.09.2008 and subsequent to the said date, for the purpose of conferring a career advancement increment and that implementation of the Scheme shall not result in a situation where the juniors are permitted to draw more salary than their seniors. Accordingly, the pay of the seniors were directed to be stepped up to that of their juniors. Even though the Government filed SLP (C) before the Hon’ble Apex Court, it was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to file a Review Petition before this Court.

5. Accordingly, the Government R.P. No.228/2018 in W.A. No.488/2017 and it was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court as per Ext.P10 judgment. The Government in accordance with the above judgments passed Ext.P11 Government Order ordering the Director of Collegiate Education to correct the anomalous situation which has arisen as a result of the implementation of 6th Pay WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 6 Revision Scheme wherein juniors are drawing a higher pay than their seniors and to step up the pay of seniors to be at par with the pay of their juniors. On 19.06.2019, the Government as per Ext.P12 clarified that Ext.P11 order is applicable to all similarly placed teachers in the State and that senior junior anomaly has to be rectified in respect of Teachers in the same Department of the same College.

6. However, when the proposal for stepping up the pay of the petitioner was placed by the Principal of the College before the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education, it was rejected stating that he could not extent the benefits of Ext.P11 to the petitioner without any formal orders from this Court and also by incorrectly stating that there are no anomalies in the case of the petitioner. Even though Ext.P21 representation was submitted by the petitioner before the Principal Secretary, Higher Education on 15.11.2024, no WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 7 orders till date is passed by him. Hence the petitioner is before this Court.

7. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 to 4.

8. As against Exts.P4 and P19, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P21 representation before 2nd respondent. The contention of the petitioner is that Ext.P19 order was passed without considering the law laid down by this Court in Exts.P8 to P10 judgments, Ext.P11 Government Order and clarification given by the 2nd respondent.

9. Considering the above facts, I am of the view that the 2nd respondent can consider the grievance raised by the petitioner in Ext.P21 and take appropriate decision thereon expeditiously in the light of the law laid down by this WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 8 Court. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P21 representation adverting to Exts.P8 to P10 judgments, Ext.P11 Government Order and Ext.P12 clarification also. Orders shall be passed within a period of four months. Sd/- N.NAGARESH JUDGE WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 9 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12544/2025 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 Exhibit P2 Exhibit P3 Exhibit P4 Exhibit P5 Exhibit P6 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE PH.D. DEGREE CERTIFICATE DATED 29.06.2005 ISSUED BY THE UNIVERSITY OF CALICUT A PHOTOCOPY OF THE 6TH UGC PAY REVISION SCHEME NOTIFIED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHER EDUCATION, RESOURCE MINISTRY DEVELOPMENT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA DATED 31.12.2008 HUMAN OF PHOTOCOPY A (P) NO.58/2010/H.EDN. DATED 27.03.2010 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT G.O OF A PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.D2/2459/2022/DCEDDEKM OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 29.06.2022 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER OF THE MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCES (DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION) DATED 27.07.1998 TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT INTIMATING THE 5TH UGC PAY REVISION SCHEME A PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER OF THE MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCES (DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION) DATED 27.07.1998 TO THE EDUCATION SECRETARIES OF ALL STATES/UNION TERRITORIES WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 Exhibit P7 Exhibit P8 Exhibit P9 10 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE G.O (P) NO.171/99/H.EDN. DATED 21.12.1999 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON’BLE COURT IN DR.BEENA T. ABRAHAM & ORS .V. GOVERNMENT OF INDIA & ORS W.P (C) NO. 32933/2014 DATED 28.10.2016 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE DIVISION BENCH OF THIS HON’BLE COURT IN GOVERNMENT OF KERALA .V. DR.BEENA T.ABRAHAM & ORS W.A.NO.488/2017 DATED 06.06.2017 Exhibit P10 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN R.P NO.228/ 2018 IN W.A.NO.488/2017 DATED 13.06.2018 Exhibit P11 A PHOTOCOPY OF G.O (RT) NO.1691/2018/HEDN DATED 11.09.2018 Exhibit P12 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER NO. D1/375/2017/HEDN ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19.06.2019 Exhibit P13 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE G.O (MS) NO.210/2022/ FIN DATED 03.12.2022 Exhibit P14 Exhibit P15 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 30.05.2023 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15.01.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 6TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P16 PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29.01.2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER WP(C) No.12544 of 2025 Exhibit P17 Exhibit P18 Exhibit P19 Exhibit P20 11 TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT A PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT DATED 15.04.2024 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPLY OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 16.05.2024 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.D2/2459/2022/DCEDDEKM OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 12.06.2024 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE PAY AND ALLOWANCE OF TEACHERS OF THE COLLEGE ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT FOR APRIL 2020 Exhibit P21 A PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.11.2024

Find similar cases Start drafting free
This is the original judgment text as indexed from the source corpus. Always verify against the official court record before relying on it in a filing — you can do so on eCourts or the Supreme Court of India website. ← Search more judgments