Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 295 (HP)

Jitender Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2011-01-07

V.K.SHARMA

body2011
JUDGMENT V.K.Sharma, J. The petitioner was working as lecturer (commerce) in DAV College, Sujanpur Tihra, District Hamirpur, H. P. when the said college was taken over by the respondent-State vide notification dated 28.8.2001, Annexure A-4 and was renamed as ‘Thakur Jagdev Chand Govt. Degree College,’ Sujanpur Tihra. 2. Consequently services of the teaching staff of the said college including that of the petitioner were also taken over vide notification dated 31.10.2001, Annexure A-5 subject to the terms and conditions, inter alia, as under: “ The above appointees will be required to clear “NET EXAMINATION” as prescribed in R&P Rules within a period of three years, failing which their increments will be withheld.” 3. The relevant R&P Rules have been brought on record by the petitioner as Annexure A-6, Rule 7(vii) whereof is as under: “NET shall remain the compulsory requirement for appointment as Lecturer even for candidates having Ph.D. Degree. However, the candidate who have completed, M. Phil Degree or have submitted Ph. D. thesis in the concerned subject upto 31.12.1993, are exempted from appearing in the NET examination.” 4. It appears that initially annual increments were granted to the teaching staff including the petitioner in due course of time. However, lateron the same came to be withdrawn in terms of clarification issued vide letter dated 23.11.2004, Annexure A-8, and notice dated 14.7.2005, Annexure A-9. Being aggrieved the petitioner has filed the present petition on the following prayer vide para 7(i): “That the notice dated 14.7.2005 regarding withdrawal of earned increments, withholding of future increments and affecting the recoveries against the applicant may very kindly be quashed and set aside and respondents may be restrained from withdrawing/withholding the increments and affecting recoveries from the applicant on the basis of Annexure A-8 and Annexure A-9 and withdrawal/withholding of the increments may very kindly be restored to the applicant with all consequential benefits. 5. In reply on behalf of the respondents, the following stand has been taken vide para 6(ii): “ That in reply to this para it is submitted that on taking over of the college by the Govt. the services of the staff working there was also taken over. 5. In reply on behalf of the respondents, the following stand has been taken vide para 6(ii): “ That in reply to this para it is submitted that on taking over of the college by the Govt. the services of the staff working there was also taken over. The services of the applicant were also taken over vide notification dated 31st October, 2001 subject to the terms and conditions in which it has been clearly 3 stipulated at No.1 that these appointees will be required to clear NET examination as prescribed in R&P Rules within a period of three years failing which their increments will be withheld. Hence, it is wrong to aver on the part of the applicant that since the applicant was duly approved he was exempted from passing NET. 6. On a plain reading of the above condition incorporated vide notification dated 31.10.2001, Annexure A-5, the appointees were required to clear ‘NET EXAMINATION’ as prescribed under R&P Rules within a period of three years failing which their increments were liable to be withheld. However, in view of Rule 7(vii) of R&P Rules extracted hereinabove this condition was not applicable to the petitioner who had already acquired the requisite qualification of M.Phil. in the year 1990 and Ph.D. in the year 1996, vide certificates Annexures A-1 and A-2.. 7. In view of the above, the petition is allowed. Consequently the impugned clarification issued vide letter dated 23.11.2004, Annexure A-8 and notice dated 14.7.2005, Annexure A9, in so far as the same relate to the petitioner are quashed along with consequential benefits, if any. 8. The petition stands disposed of, so also pending CMP(s), if any.