Judgment : Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Respondent-University issued an advertisement bearing No. 7/2008 for filling up 46 posts of Assistant Scientists/Assistant Professors etc. Petitioner also participated in the selection process and was offered appointment letter on 26.9.2009. He joined the duties on 30.11.2009. 2. Petitioner submitted representation to the Registrar of the respondent-University seeking Non-Practicing Allowance from the date of joining as Assistant Professor (Veterinary Sciences) in the Department of Silvicuture and Agro-Forestry. The representation made by the petitioner was forwarded by the Deputy Registrar (Establishment) to the Controller of respondent-University on 4.4.2010. Matter for the release of Non-Practicing Allowance was placed before the Finance Committee in its meeting held on 11.8.2010. The Finance Committee recommended the case of the petitioner for the grant of Non-Practicing Allowance with effect from 30.11.2009. Recommendations made by the Finance Committee were further placed before the Board of Management in its 83rd meeting held on 12.11.2010. The Board of Management also approved the proposal for the grant of Non-Practicing Allowance as notified by the Comptroller of the University on 27.11.2010. In sequel to notification dated 27.11.2010, the entry with regard to grant of Non -Practicing Allowance was recorded in the Service Book of the petitioner by the concerned Head of Department and was placed before the Audit Wing of the University for auditing the entry. However, the local auditor has pointed out that “the referred letter of H.P. Govt. is regarding grant of NPA to the Veterinary Doctors (Working in Hospitals etc.). The grant of NAP to Assistant Professor (Veterinary Science) is required to be justified or approved by the A.D./Govt.” Professor and Head sent communication to the Registrar on 14.1.2011 whereby he has specifically stated that the University was having 65 cattlehead in the Diary Section of the Department and Dr. Rohit Bishist, Assistant Professor (Veterinary Sciences) was providing the clinical services regularly to these cattlehead, besides teaching assignments as there was no Veterinary Officer after the retirement of Dr. Bhaik, who had been earlier providing clinical services to the cattlehead. He recommended the case of the petitioner for the release of non-practicing allowance. Rohit Bishist, Assistant Professor (Veterinary Sciences) was providing the clinical services regularly to these cattlehead, besides teaching assignments as there was no Veterinary Officer after the retirement of Dr. Bhaik, who had been earlier providing clinical services to the cattlehead. He recommended the case of the petitioner for the release of non-practicing allowance. The Registrar of the University sent communication to the Principal Secretary (Horticulture) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh requesting him to obtain and convey the approval of the Finance Department of the State Government for the grant of non-practicing allowance to the petitioner with effect from 30.11.2009 in terms of notification dated 7.7.2007. The Special Secretary (Horticulture) sent a communication to the Registrar of respondent-University on 21.5.2011 stating therein that before the matter can be processed further, he was requested to clarify whether earlier Veterinary Officers posted in U.H.F. Nauni were getting non-practicing allowance before the present incumbent. The Registrar of the respondent-University in sequel to order dated 21.5.2011 informed the Principal Secretary (Horticulture) that non-practicing allowance @ 450/- per month was granted to Assistant Professor (Veterinary Science) vide office order dated 23.7.2005. The Registrar again took up the matter with the Principal Secretary (Horticulture) on 25.7.2011. The Special Secretary (Horticulture) sought information from the Registrar of University why prior approval of Government was not obtained when non-practicing allowance was first granted to Assistant Professor (Veterinary Science). The Registrar informed the Principal Secretary (Horticulture) that the Finance Committee has already approved the case of the petitioner and the Board of Management has also approved the same on 27.11.2010. The Registrar again requested the Principal Secretary (Horticulture) to obtain and convey the approval of the Finance Department. However, fact of the matter is that the Deputy Secretary (Horticulture) informed the Registrar of the respondent University on 26.3.2012 that the Finance Department has not accorded approval in the matter. Relevant extract of letter dated 26.3.2012 reads as under: “Examined. Finance Department observe that the nature of duties and responsibility of teaching faculties/Scientists in the Veterinary College of university is entirely different to the Veterinary Doctors performing the job of treatment of animals in Veterinary Dispensaries/Hospitals etc. and they are not entitled to the grant of NPA as per Animal Husbandry Department’s notification dated 8.4.1997 since they (Teaching faculties/Scientists) do not treat animals like Veterinary Doctors. Besides the Teaching faculties are governed by pay/allowances as per U.G.C. pattern. and they are not entitled to the grant of NPA as per Animal Husbandry Department’s notification dated 8.4.1997 since they (Teaching faculties/Scientists) do not treat animals like Veterinary Doctors. Besides the Teaching faculties are governed by pay/allowances as per U.G.C. pattern. As such Dr. Rohit Bishist who is appointed as an Assistant Professor (Veterinary Science) is not covered in the defined duties/responsibilities as attached with the post of a Veterinary Doctors, for not being entitled to the grant of N.P.A. like Veterinary Doctors.” 4. The Registrar again took up the matter with the Principal Secretary (Horticulture) on 25.5.2012. The Registrar of the University was informed by the Deputy Secretary (Horticulture) that the matter was again taken up with the Finance Department and the Finance Department has reiterated its earlier stand. The Vice Chancellor has also taken up the matter with the Principal Secretary (Horticulture) vide U.O. letter dated 26/31.10.2012. The matter was again taken up with the Finance Department. The Finance Department has again reiterated its earlier stand. The matter was thereafter taken up by the Registrar before the Deputy Comptroller (Audit) on 6.2.2012 and 15.3.2012. The Deputy Comptroller (Audit) informed the Registrar of respondent-University on 24.3.2012 that in view of the decision of the Board of Management to grant the non-practicing allowance to the Assistant Professor (Veterinary Science) contrary to the provisions of statute, the matter stands already referred to the Director L.A.D. on 29.2.2012 seeking necessary clarification to regulate the matter. 5. What emerges from the facts enumerated hereinabove is that petitioner has been appointed as Assistant Professor (Veterinary Science). He has made representation for the release of non-practicing allowance. Case of the petitioner has been recommended by the Finance Committee on 30.11.2009. The highest decision making body of the respondent-Department has approved recommendations of the Finance Committee on 27.11.2010. Necessary entries were also made in the service book of the petitioner. However, non-practicing allowance was not released to the petitioner only on the ground that the non-practicing allowance was being paid to the Veterinary Doctors working in the hospital. Professor and Head has informed the Registrar of respondent-University that the petitioner was also doing the clinic services regularly in the Diary Section of the respondent-University. One Dr. Bhaik, who was working as Assistant Professor (Veterinary Sciences), was granted non-practicing allowance @ Rs.450/-per month. Professor and Head has informed the Registrar of respondent-University that the petitioner was also doing the clinic services regularly in the Diary Section of the respondent-University. One Dr. Bhaik, who was working as Assistant Professor (Veterinary Sciences), was granted non-practicing allowance @ Rs.450/-per month. The Registrar of respondent-University has entered into protracted correspondence with the Principal Secretary (Horticulture) by emphasising that case of the petitioner was genuine and he was discharging the clinical services also. Respondent-State had been raising objection after objection instead of taking a final decision. The counterparts of the petitioner working in C.S.K.H.P.K.V. Palampur have been granted non-practicing allowance. The Finance Department has rejected the case of the petitioner on the ground that responsibility of teaching faculties/Scientists in the Veterinary College of University is entirely different to the Veterinary Doctors performing the job of treatment of animals in Veterinary Dispensaries/Hospitals etc. and they are not entitled to the grant of non-practicing allowance as per Animal Husbandry Department’s notification dated 8.4.1997. It was further stand of the Finance Department that Teaching faculties/Scientists do not treat animals like Veterinary Doctors and they are governed by pay/allowances as per U.G. pattern. Petitioner had been providing clinical services regularly to 65 cattlehead in the Dairy Section. One Dr. Bhaik, who was working as Assistant Professor (Veterinary Sciences), had also been granted non-practicing allowance. The respondent-University has admitted in its reply that respondent University has more than 65 catttlehead in the Dairy Section and the petitioner has been providing clinical services regularly to these cattlehead besides teaching assignments in the concerned department. Since Dr. Bhaik, was also working Assistant Professor (Veterinary Science) and was granted non-practicing allowance, the petitioner is also entitled to non-practicing allowance on the same analogy. The teaching faculties/scientists in the respondent-University are also performing the job of treatment of animals like veterinary doctors in Veterinary Dispensaries/Hospitals etc. The decision of the State not to grant N.P.A. to the petitioner is arbitrary and unreasonable. The Finance Committee and Board of Management have decided to grant non practicing allowance to the petitioner taking into consideration the duties discharged by him. The respondent-University has already granted non-practicing allowance to Dr. Kuldip Gupta, Ex-Assistant Professor (Veterinary Science), as per Annexures P-5. His pay was also fixed as per Annexure P-6 dated 23.7.2005. The Finance Committee and Board of Management have decided to grant non practicing allowance to the petitioner taking into consideration the duties discharged by him. The respondent-University has already granted non-practicing allowance to Dr. Kuldip Gupta, Ex-Assistant Professor (Veterinary Science), as per Annexures P-5. His pay was also fixed as per Annexure P-6 dated 23.7.2005. Respondent-State has also granted non-practicing allowance to teachers/scientists of the College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Palampur vide letter dated 2.6.2008 at par with the Veterinarians in Animal Husbandry Department with immediate effect. Petitioner is also entitled to the same treatment. Dr. Y.S. Parmar University of Horticulture and Forestry, Nauni and C.S.K.H.P. Agriculture University, Palampurhave been created under the same Act. 6. Accordingly, in view of the analysis and discussion made hereinabove, the writ petition is allowed. Annexures R-12 dated 26.3.2012, R-14 dated 27.9.2012 and R-16 dated 29.11.2012 are quashed and set aside. Respondents are directed to pay the petitioner non-practicing allowance from his initial date of appointment as Assistant Professor (Veterinary Science), i.e. 30.11.2009 with interest @ 7% per annum within a period of three months from today. Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.