Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2011 DIGILAW 611 (MP)

Subhash Jain v. State of M. P.

2011-05-18

J.K.MAHESHWARI

body2011
JUDGMENT : J.K. Maheshwari, J.:- Invoking the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and challenging the order Annexure-P/1 dated 3/7/2009 refusing to recommend the case of the petitioner for grant of senior selection scale, the petitioner has filed this petition. On issuing show cause notice, reply has been filed by the respondents justifying their action and as per the proceedings Annexure-R/1, it appears that recommendation in favour of the petitioner has not been made on account of not passing two Refresher Course as required under the circular issued by the Government of Madhya Pradesh, Higher Education Department bearing No.F-1/233/99/38-1/99 dated 11/10/1999. It is said that the Petitioner has only passed out one Refresher Course as apparent from Annexure-P/6 at page-21 from 25th July, 2005 to 14th August, 2005 after grant of senior scale, however, he is not entitled to grant senior selection scale in the light of the said circular. Learned counsel for the petitioner by placing reliance on the judgment of this Court in the case of Maharaj Singh Yadav Vs. State of M.P. & Another, 2008 (IV) MPJR SN 27, attached as Annexure-P/7, contended that this Court while considering the career advancement scheme issued by the UGC observed that if a person possessing the qualification as per the recruitment rules, he is exempted from the condition of Refresher Course/Summer Institutes. The aforesaid aspect has not been considered by the respondents at the time of refusing to recommend his case vide Annexure R-1 and to pass order Annexure-P/1. In view of aforesaid, it is urged that the order passed by the University is without due consideration of law laid down by this Court, therefore, the said order Annexure P/1 and the recommendation Annexure R-1 are liable to be quashed with the direction to the respondents to reconsider the case of the petitioner, and to recommend for grant senior selection scale. On the other hand, learned counsel for respondent No.3-University, contend that in reference to the circular of the Government bearing No.F-1/233/99/38-1/99 dated 11/10/1999, petitioner's case has rightly not been recommend for grant of senior selection scale as he has not passed out two Refresher Courses which is the requirement of the said circular, therefore, the order Annexure-P/1 and the proceedings Annexure-R/1 has rightly been drawn. In view of aforesaid, prayer is made to dismiss the writ petition filed by the petitioner. In view of aforesaid, prayer is made to dismiss the writ petition filed by the petitioner. Undisputedly the career advancement scheme is under the UGC guidelines until and unless contrary rules are made, the same deserves to be prevailed over. In that view of the matter, particularly when the person possessing the eligibility to the post and in such circumstances he is not required to undergo the two Refresher Courses as observed by this Court in the case of Maharaj Singh Yadav (supra). In view of forgoing, I am of the considered opinion that the order Annexure-P/1 and the proceedings as drown up by Annexure-R/1 is without due consideration of the law laid down by this Court in the case of Maharaj Singh Yadav (supra). The respondent No.3/University is directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner in the light of the observation made in the aforesaid judgment and if it is found that the petitioner is eligible to get senior selection scale, the recommendation be made accordingly, otherwise reasoned order be passed in that regard. It is needless to say that if the petitioner feels aggrieved by the said order, he may take recourse of law afresh. The aforesaid exercise be completed within a period of three months form the date of communication of this order.