ORDER : By means of this petition, the petitioners have fundamentally challenged the action of the respondents No. 1 to 4 for declaring them ineligible for consideration under the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) to the higher grade (AGP Rs.7,000) whereas the persons who were appointed on the same day or thereafter, have been given the said benefit, in colourable exercise of power. The petitioners have further urged this court for directing the respondents No. 1 to 4 for considering their upgradation of AGP under CAS. 2. Facts which are not in dispute are that the petitioner No.1, Mrs. Tara Sen (UR) was appointed in terms of the notification dated 06.04.2010 as the Assistant Professor in the Civil & Transportation Engineering Department, the petitioner No.2, Ms Seena Priyan (OBC) was appointed in terms of the said notification dated 06.04.2010 as the Assistant Professor in the Production Engineering Department whereas the petitioner No.3, Dr. Gyanabati Khuraijam (OBC) was appointed as the Assistant Professor in terms of the said notification dated 06.04.2010 under the Humanities and Social Science Department. 3. From the records so produced by the respondents No. 1 to 4, it would appear that in the 26th meeting of the Board of Governors (BOG) held on 18.06.2013 the recommendation of the Selection Committee for granting upgradation under CAS by increasing AGP to the in house regular faculty members was approved. In terms of the said resolution, Mr. Rahul Banerjee (the respondent No.5), Dr. S.N. Pradan (the respondent No.6), Mr. Kamalesh Debnath (the respondent No.7), Dr(Mrs.) Mitali Saha (the respondent No.8), Mr. Uttam Kumar Mandal (the respondent No.9), Mr. Jayanta Kumar Rakshit (the respondent No.10), Mr. Mitra Barun Sarkar (the respondent No.11), Mrs. Tamasi Moyra (the respondent No.12), Mr. Nirmalya Kar (the respondent No.13) and Mr. Dr. R.K. Yadav (the respondent No.14), who were holding the post of Assistant Professors were given upgradation by increasing the Academic Grade Pay (AGP). 4. From the minutes of the said 26th meeting of the BOG/National Institute of Technology Agartala (NITA), it reveals that the meetings of the Selection Committee were held during April 27-28, 2013. 53 applicants of various disciplines appeared in the interview on the basis of the call letters issued to those applicants. 4. From the minutes of the said 26th meeting of the BOG/National Institute of Technology Agartala (NITA), it reveals that the meetings of the Selection Committee were held during April 27-28, 2013. 53 applicants of various disciplines appeared in the interview on the basis of the call letters issued to those applicants. There is no dispute that the petitioners were even not issued the call letters and hence one additional relief as incorporated in the writ petition is for direction on the respondents No. 1 to 4 for issuing them the call letters for appearing in the interview. The said relief has become, by efflux of time, infructuous. 5. The petitioners have submitted that the respondent No.5, Mr. Rahul Banerjee (UR) was appointed in terms of the resolution adopted in the 14th BOG/NITA held on 06.04.2010. In the same meeting the BOG/NITA approved the selection of the petitioners. The selection of the respondent No.6, Dr. S.N. Pradhan (UR), the respondent No.7, Mr. Kamalesh Debnath (OBC) and the respondent No.8, Dr.(Mrs.) Mitali Saha (UR) was also approved by the same BOG/NITA held on 06.04.2010. The selection of the respondent No.9, Mr. Uttam Kumar Mandal (SC), the respondent No.11, Mr. Mitra Barun Sarkar (SC) and the respondent No.12, Mrs Tamasi Moyra (UR) was approved by the 22th meeting of the BOG/NITA held on 05.04.20 12, whereas the selection of the respondent No.10, Mr. Jayanta Kumar Rakshit (OBC), the respondent No.13, Mr. Nirmalya Kar (OBC) and the respondent No.14, Dr. R.K. Yadav (OBC) was approved by the 15th meeting of the BOG/NITA held on 30.06.2010. All the respondents no. 5 to 14 were appointed in the post of Assistant Professor in their respective branches. This is also not in dispute that the respondents No. 5 to 14 have been allowed the upgradation of the pay by enhancing the AGP from Rs.6,000 to Rs.7,000. But, such upgradation under the CAS was denied to the petitioners and as a result, the petitioners are getting much less pay. 6. What the petitioners have asserted in the writ petition on their date of selection/appointment vis-a-vis the date of selection/appointment of the respondents No. 5 to 14 has not been disputed by the respondents No. 1 to 4, rather they have stated that those are matters of records. 6. What the petitioners have asserted in the writ petition on their date of selection/appointment vis-a-vis the date of selection/appointment of the respondents No. 5 to 14 has not been disputed by the respondents No. 1 to 4, rather they have stated that those are matters of records. But, at the time of hearing no such records have been produced to show that the dates of selection/appointment as asserted were not in consistent to those records. 7. It is also admitted that in the 24th meeting of the BOG/NITA held on 25.08.2012, the following resolution was adopted: “Addl. Item No.24.10.4 To consider implementation of CAS to the regular Faculty members of NIT Agartala. The BOG approved the proposal for adopting the CAS according to 5th CPC guidelines and as per the Ministry of HRD order No.F.33-7/2011-TS-III dated March 14, 2012.” In terms of the said resolution, by the notification dated 15.11.2012 (AnnexureP/5 to the writ petition), the Director, NITA invited applications from all regular faculty members to submit their applications in the prescribed format by 16.12.2012 alongwith all necessary details to consider for granting CAS benefit. 8. From the records, it appears that all the three petitioners applied for the said benefit in terms of the notification dated 15.11.2012 as would be apparent from the list of the applicants for Career Advance Scheme (CAS) as appended to the office order under No. NITA.2.1(363-Estt)/2012 dated 21.03.2013. In response to the notification dated 15.11.2012 and the subsequent notification dated 14.12.2012, as by that notification the date of submission of the applications was extended up to 10.01.2013, the NITA received 77 applications from the regular faculty members for consideration of upgradation of the respective posts under CAS. In view of the above, by the office order dated 19.03.2013 under No.F.NITA.2.1(363-Estt)/2012/14671-75, a Selection Committee was constituted as under : (1) Professor Kamakhya Prasad Ghatak - Chairman (2) Professor Harwant Singh Chhabra - Member (3) Professor Richi Prasad Sharma - Member It has been also decided that the above Selection Committee shall complete the entire process of selection by 31.03.2013. 9. On scrutiny of the applications, five applicants appearing for the upgradation as per the 5th CPC norms from the post of Assistant Professors/Selection Grade were found ineligible for CAS. 9. On scrutiny of the applications, five applicants appearing for the upgradation as per the 5th CPC norms from the post of Assistant Professors/Selection Grade were found ineligible for CAS. From the Note No.19 in the File No.NITA.2.1(363-Estt)/2012 as produced before this court by the respondents No. 1 to 4, the following has transpired : D. List of non-eligible candidates for CAS Sl. No. Name of the candidates Department Remarks 1. Mrs Tara Sen CE Experience is less than 5 years for those having ME/M.Tech degree and 4 years for those with Ph.D. 2. Dr. Srimanta Roy CHE 3. Dr. Gyanabati Khuraijam HSS 4. Miss Seena P. PE 5. Mr. S.K. Biswal CE 6. Dr. Debashis Neyogi HSS Not eligible for due to lack of requisite experience for Professorship 7. Dr. Paritosh Bhattacharya CSE 8. Dr. Uttam Kr. Bera Maths 9. Dr. R.S. Panua ME For declaring the petitioners ineligible, the remarks contained in Note No.19, as extracted, has been utilised by the respondents. 10. In para 11 of the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents No. 1 to 4, it has been asserted as under : “That I say that the application of the petitioners for granting CAS vide institute notification No.F.NITA.2.1(363-Estt)/2012/7872-77 dated 15.11.2012 and No.F.NITA.2.1363-Estt/2012/8897-104 dated 14.12.2012 were examined by a duly constituted Committee and found not eligible so the petitioners were not called for interview. The Committee has submitted a list of eligible and non-eligible candidates in the category of Assistant Professor and Lecturer (Senior Scale) for CAS. And from Assistant Professor level the petitioners namely Smt. Tara Sen, Smt. Seena Priyan, Dr. Gyanabati Khuraijam alongwith two others Dr. Srimanta Roy & Sri Sushant Kr. Biswal have been declared non-eligible for the reason that their experience were less than 5 years for those having ME/M.Tech. degree and 4 years for those possessing Ph.D. degree. It is to be mentioned here that the Board of Governors (BOG) of NIT Agartala in its 24th meeting held on 25.08.2012 approved the proposal for adopting Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) according to 5th CPC guidelines. It is to be further mentioned here that in 5th CPC the faculty cadre structure was Lecturer, Assistant Professor and Professor. There were 2(two) higher grade to the post of Lecturer, under CAS viz. Lecturer Senior Scale and Lecturer Selection grade. It is to be further mentioned here that in 5th CPC the faculty cadre structure was Lecturer, Assistant Professor and Professor. There were 2(two) higher grade to the post of Lecturer, under CAS viz. Lecturer Senior Scale and Lecturer Selection grade. On the other hand under 6th CPC the faculty cadre structure was as follows : Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor. Incumbent Lecturer under 5th CPC were re-designated as Assistant Professor under 6th CPC. Now as per 5th CPC guidelines incumbent Lecturer (redesignated as Assistant Professor under 6th CPC) having ME/M.Tech. Degree will move to the next higher grade of Lecturer viz. Lecturer Senior Scale who have completed 5 years of service after regular appointment. For incumbent Lecturer i.e. Assistant Professor having Ph.D. degree and completing 4 years of service after regular appointment will move to next higher grade of Lecturer Senior scale. The petitioners joined to the Service of NIT Agartala as Assistant Professor (under 6th CPC) in the year 2010. So as per the accepted guidelines for CAS under 5th CPC the petitioners were declared non-eligible by the Scrutiny Committee. The date of joining of the petitioners to the service of NIT Agartala have been mentioned herein below in a tabular form. Sl. No. Name of the petitioner/ Faculty members Joined with Qualifi­cation Served as contrac­tual or otherwise Date of joining in regular service on Remark 1. Smt. Tara Sen, Assistant Professor B.E., M.Tech. Served as a Teaching Assistant on contractual basis w.e.f. 01.08.2008 to 30.06.2009 and as Lecturer on contractual w.e.f. 09.07.2009 to 09.04.2010 in NIT Agartala Joined as Assistant Professor on regular basis on 07.05.2010 in NIT Agartala 2. Smt. Gyanabati Khuraijam, Assistant Professor M.A., Ph.D ..... Joined as Assistant Professor on regular basis on 07.05.2010 in NIT Agartala 3. Miss Seena P., Assistant Professor M. Tech. ..... Joined as Assistant Professor on regular basis on 13.05.2010 Further it is to be mentioned herein that as per MHRD letter No. F.No. 23-1/2008-TS II dated 18.08.2009 regarding revision of pay in centrally funded Technical Institute on recommendation of 6th CPC (Annexure R-6) it was stated that UGC pay structure and designation would be followed as notified by MHRD vide letter No.1-32/2006-U.II/U.1(i) dated 31st December 2008 (Annexure R-7) and it was decided in the minutes of 24th BOG meeting held on 25.08.2012 (Annexure R 8) that 5th C.P.C. guide line for CAS to be followed. And as per approval of the Board in its 24th meeting held on 25.08.2012 the guide lines for CAS issued by All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) letter Vide No. F.F.D.PSSC/Clairf/2003/1 dated 10.09.2003 (Annexure R-9) and MHRD office Memo No. F.2018/2003-TS.III dated 17.08.2004 (Annexure-10) was followed for the scrutiny of the application. And Notification No. F.1(13-1)-DHE/98 dated 03.02.2000 issued by Govt. of Tripura on the basis of AICTE scale has also been annexed herein as Annexure R-11. (The copy MHRD letter dated 18.08.2009, copy of MHRD letter dated 31.12.2008, Minutes of 24th BOG meeting held on 25.08.2012, AICTE letter dated 10.09.2003 and MHRD Memo dated 17.08.2004 and notification dated 03.02.2000 have been annexed herewith as Annexure R-6, R-7, R-9, R-10 & R-11 respectively.” [Emphasis supplied] 11. What has emerged from the Note No.19 above, as the assigned basis of exclusion of the petitioners from consideration has been coming in conflict partly, with what has been averred in para 11 of the counter-affidavit filed by the respondents No. 1 to 4. But, finally it has been stated that the petitioners were declared non-eligible for the reason that their experience was less than 5(five) years, for those having ME/M.Tech degree, and 4(four) years for those possessing Ph.D. degree. As per the 5th CPC guidelines, the incumbent Lecturer (redesignated as the Assistant Professor under the 6th CPC) having ME/M.Tech degree will move to the next higher grade of Lecturer for their being five years of service after regular appointment. For incumbent Lecturer i.e. Assistant Professor having Ph.D degree and completing 4 years of service after regular appointment will move to the next higher grade. According to the respondents, the 24th BOG meeting, held on 25.08.2013, has prescribed the 5th CPC guidelines for CAS to be followed, but from the reading of additional item No.24.10.4 of the minutes of the 24th meeting of the BOG/NITA held on 25.08.2012, it appears that not only the 5th CPC guidelines was prescribed, but it was also prescribed to carry out the exercise in terms of the Ministry of HRD Order No.F.337/2011-TS-III dated 14.03.2012 (AnnexureP/4 to the writ petition), but in the counter-affidavit the reference to the said communication dated 14.03.2012 of the Ministry of Human Resources Development (MHRD) has not been mentioned. 12. 12. The respondents No. 1 to 4 have clearly stated that for purpose of selection for upgradation to the next AGP, the guidelines for CAS issued by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) letter under No.F.F.D.PSSC/Clarif/2003/1 dated 10.09.2003 (Annexure-R/9 to the counter affidavit) and the MHRD office memorandum No.F.20-18/2003-TS-III dated 17.08.2004 (Annexure-R/10 to the counter affidavit) were followed for scrutiny of the applications. From the Appendix-I of the said letter dated 10.09.2003, it would be apparent that broad areas of consideration under the revised Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) are provided in clause (1.1). For purpose of reference, the relevant parts are reproduced : “1.1. General 1.1.0. Minimum length of service for eligibility to move into the grade of Lecturer (Senior Scale) would be four years for those with Ph.D, five years for those with M.Phil, M.Tech, and six years for others at the level of Lecturer, and for eligibility to move into the grade of Lecturer (Selection Grade)/Assistant Professor, the minimum length of service as Lecturer (Senior Scale) shall be uniformly five years. 1.1.1. For movement into grades of Professor, the minimum eligibility criterion would be Ph.D. Those without Ph.D can go up to the level of Lecturer (Selection Grade)/Assistant Professor. 1.1.2. An Assistant Professor with a minimum of eight years of service in that grade will be eligible to be considered for appointment as a Professor. 1.1.3. The Selection Committee for Career Advancement shall be the same as those for Direct Recruitment for each category.” “1.6. The requirement of consistent satisfactory performance appraisal report shall be the mandatory requirement for Career Advancement from Lecturer to Lecturer (Senior Scale) and from Lecturer (Senior Scale) to Lecturer (Senior Grade)/Assistant Professor. For requirement of completing the courses would be as follows : (i) For Lecturer to Lecturer (Senior Scale), summer/winter school courses of total duration 4 weeks would be compulsory. (ii) For Lecturer (Senior Scale) to Lecturer (Selection Grade)/Assistant Professor, summer/winter school courses of total duration of 4 weeks would be compulsory. (iii) The senior teachers like Assistant Professor/Lecturer (Selection Grade) and Professors may opt to attend 4 seminars/conferences/workshops (National or International Level) in their subject area and present papers on those areas or attend AICTE approved summer/winter school courses to be offered by various approved institutions. (iii) The senior teachers like Assistant Professor/Lecturer (Selection Grade) and Professors may opt to attend 4 seminars/conferences/workshops (National or International Level) in their subject area and present papers on those areas or attend AICTE approved summer/winter school courses to be offered by various approved institutions. Note : Other terms and conditions of Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) will remain same as per the addendum issued vide Letter F.No.1-65/NEC/98-99 dated July 31st 2001.” 13. In the office memorandum dated 17.08.2004, on the subject of promotion under the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) for the faculty members of the National Institute of Technology (NIT) and clarifications regarding eligibility criteria has been prescribed by the AICTE. The following has been provided for guidance of the NITs : “The undersigned is directed to refer to para 4 of this Ministry’s Office Memorandum (OM) of even number dated 15.09.2003 on the subject mentioned above and to say that the Ministry has been receiving a number of queries from NITs regarding the exact eligibility criteria for promotion under CAS as AICTE has issued different clarifications at different points of time which are at variance with each other. The matter has been considered in the Ministry and it is clarified that instructions contained in the letter No.FD/PSSC/Clarif/2003/1 dated 10.09.2003 of AICTE with regard to eligibility criteria for promotions under CAS for different posts of faculty shall be applicable to NITs. But any other clarifications issued by the AICTE subsequently after this date shall not be applicable to NITs. If there is any specific operational difficulty or anomaly with regard to implementation of this order, the same may be referred to the Ministry for appropriate consideration and clarifications. Sd/illegible (Dr. G.L. Jambulkar) Deputy Educational Adviser Tel : 23384276” 14. According to the respondents, for purpose of following the 5th CPC norms, the above two guidelines are to be followed. In the communication dated 31.12.2008 under No.1-32/2006-U.II/U.I(i), AnnexureR/7 to the counter affidavit, addressed to the Secretary, University Grants Commission by the Ministry of Human Resource Development Department (MHRD), the revised pay scale and service benefits under the Career Advancement Scheme for teachers and equivalent had been made. In the communication dated 31.12.2008 under No.1-32/2006-U.II/U.I(i), AnnexureR/7 to the counter affidavit, addressed to the Secretary, University Grants Commission by the Ministry of Human Resource Development Department (MHRD), the revised pay scale and service benefits under the Career Advancement Scheme for teachers and equivalent had been made. It has been provided by the said communication dated 31.12.2008 as under : “(a) Assistant Professor/Associate Professors/ Professors in Colleges & Universities (i) Persons entering the teaching profession in Universities and Colleges shall be designated as Assistant Professors and shall be placed in the Pay Band of Rs.15600-39100 with AGP of Rs.6000. Lecturers already in service in the prerevised scale of Rs.8000-13500, shall be redesignated as Assistant Professors with the said AGP of Rs.6000. (ii) An Assistant Professor with completed service of 4 years, possessing Ph.D Degree in the relevant discipline shall be eligible, for moving up to AGP of Rs.7000. (iii) Assistant Professors possessing M.Phil degree or postgraduate degree in professional courses approved by the relevant Statutory Body, such as LL.M/M.Tech etc. shall be eligible for the AGP of Rs.7,000 after completion of 5 years service as Assistant Professor.” 15. Thereafter, the MHRD by their communication to the Directors to all centrally funded technical institutions (CFTI) under No.F.23-1/2008/TS-II dated 18.08.2009, had communicated interalia that the pay structure and designation for all other centrally funded technical institution would generally be the same as per the revision of pay of the teachers etc. in the Universities etc. as notified by the Ministry of HRD vide letter under No.1-32/2000-U.II/U.I(1) dated 31.12.2008 and the clarifications issued thereon from time to time. However, in the cases of National Institutes of Technology (NITs), Indian School of Mines University (ISMU), Indian Institutes of Information Technology (IIITs) and Schools of Planning & Architecture (SPAs), the accelerated promotional benefits would be given while maintaining the UGC pay structure and designations. In clause (2) of the said communication dated 18.08.2009, it has been further provided as under : “2. For other Centrally Funded Technical Institutions. The pay structure and designations for all other Centrally Funded Technical Institutions will generally be the same as per the scheme of revision of pay of teachers, etc. in Universities, etc. as notified by the Ministry of HRD vide letter No.1-32/2006-U.II/U.I(i) dated 31st December, 2008 and clarification issued thereon from time to time. For other Centrally Funded Technical Institutions. The pay structure and designations for all other Centrally Funded Technical Institutions will generally be the same as per the scheme of revision of pay of teachers, etc. in Universities, etc. as notified by the Ministry of HRD vide letter No.1-32/2006-U.II/U.I(i) dated 31st December, 2008 and clarification issued thereon from time to time. However, in the case of National Institutes of Technology (NITs), Indian School of Mines University (ISMU), Indian Institutes of Information Technology (IIITs) and Schools of Planning & Architecture (SPAs), the following accelerated promotional benefits will be given while maintaining the UGC pay structure and designations; (a) Seven non-compounded advance increments shall be admissible at the entry level of recruitment as Assistant Professor to persons possessing the degree of Ph.D awarded in the relevant discipline. (b) (i) An Assistant Professor possessing the degree of Ph.D in the relevant discipline and with regular service of 3 years’ at AGP of Rs.6000/p.m. shall be eligible for moving to AGP of Rs.7000/p.m. (ii) An Assistant Professor possessing the degree of Ph.D in the relevant discipline and with regular service of 3 years’ at AGP of Rs.7000/p.m. shall be eligible for moving to AGP of Rs.8000/p.m. (iii) An Assistant Professor possessing the degree of Ph.D in the relevant discipline and with regular service of 3 years’ at AGP of Rs.8000/p.m. shall be eligible for moving to AGP of Rs.9000/p.m., and redesignated as Associate Professor.” But, the said recommendation was relating to the 6th Pay Commission and as such according to the respondents those were not relevant for purpose of providing CAS to the inhouse faculty members in the NITA following the 5th CPC norms. 16. According to the official respondents, since the petitioners did not have the required experience they were not declared eligible. But, they have not traversed the averments of the petitioners made in para 2.4 having regard to the CAS for upgradation. In para 2.4 the petitioners have asserted that from the minutes of the meetings dated 06.04.2010, 10.06.2010 and 05.11.2012 (Annexure P/1 and Annexure P/2 colly), it would be crystal clear that the petitioners have joined the post of Assistant Professor in the NIT alongwith the proforma respondents No. 5 to 8 and prior to joining of the proforma respondents No. 9 to 14. In such view of the matter, it has been asserted that the petitioners are at par in their seniority experience with the proforma respondents No. 5 to 8 and advantageously positioned in comparison to the proforma respondents No. 5 to 14. 17. In response to the said para, the respondents No. 1 to 4 have simply made a statement in their counter-affidavit that the averments made in para 2.4 are all matters of records so far the initial appointment in the NIT Agartala is concerned and they have not further elucidated the matter how the private respondents were advantageously positioned in comparison to the petitioners. They have however clearly stated that since they had not requisite experience of 5 years for those having ME/M. Tech and four years for those possessing the Ph.D. degree. That apart, from the minutes of the 24th meeting of the BOG/NITA held on 25.08.012 as reproduced above, it appears that the BOG approved the proposal for adopting the CAS in terms of the 5th CPC norms and as per the Ministry of HRD order/communiqué No.F.33-7/2011-TS.III dated 14.03.2012. Therefore, even though the CAS norms have been prescribed to be followed but at the same time the BOG had taken a conscious decision to follow the MHRD order dated 14.03.2012. In the said MHRD order/communiqué dated 14.03.2012 (Annexure P/4 to the writ petition, the following general guidelines and specific guidelines have been prescribed : a. Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) is an integral part of a rigid staff structure where the number of posts at any given level is limited. Such a scheme provides an avenue through which a qualified employee climbs to the higher rung of the career ladder, even if there is no vacancy. It, however, will not be treated as mere formality as the purpose of the scheme was for development of merit and not eligibility based promotions. Such a scheme provides an avenue through which a qualified employee climbs to the higher rung of the career ladder, even if there is no vacancy. It, however, will not be treated as mere formality as the purpose of the scheme was for development of merit and not eligibility based promotions. b. For a faculty member to gain advancement under CAS, he or she must satisfy the approved criteria under three broad heads: (i) a critical number of years in the lower level or designation and/or AGP, (ii) cumulative academic performance during the service period at the current level in terms of teaching and research output as well as sharing institutional responsibility, and (iii) proficiency and knowledge in one's chosen field of research and teaching Superior record in all these three fronts qualifies a faculty member for advancement to higher level. c. CAS has been in operation in Institutions under guidelines provided by AICTE and UGC. It is clarified that those norms and procedures are not applicable to NITs. CAS in NITs will be governed by guidelines and regulations defined by the Ministry of HRD and the Council of NITs. d. The Directors will be assisted by an in house Advisory Committee on Faculty Recruitment (ACoFAR). Necessary details of this Committee are provided in the Recruitment Rules for faculty positions. e. Any distinction between faculty recruited against vacant positions and those promoted under CAS will be abolished completely. It is clarified emphatically that unlike the UGC system, there is no distinction in qualification or achievement between internal and external candidates while assessing them suitability for higher post as in the practice prevalent in the IIT system. f. All recommendations of the Selection Committee shall take effect only from the date of approval of the recommendations by the Board or any later date as decided by the Board. There shall be no retrospective implementation of recommendations in any case (either financial or notional). g. The constitution of the Selection Committee, the procedure and criteria of selection shall be same for internal and external candidates. There shall not be a separate or special interview for CAS selection; interviews should be conducted along with candidates for direct recruitment against vacancies any. h. All Professors irrespective of the mode of selection should start at the basic pay of Rs.43,000/and AGP of Rs.10,000/on or after 01.01.2006. There shall not be a separate or special interview for CAS selection; interviews should be conducted along with candidates for direct recruitment against vacancies any. h. All Professors irrespective of the mode of selection should start at the basic pay of Rs.43,000/and AGP of Rs.10,000/on or after 01.01.2006. i. When a vacancy occurs in the higher posts and there are serving faculty members with corresponding designation under CAS, they must be adjusted as per the respective seniority list before fresh advertisements are published. For a faculty member, there should be no distinction drawn between a CAS post or a direct selection post. Reservation principles for categories specified (viz. SC/ST/OBC) should be honoured. j. Under special circumstances, if an Institute is looking for new faculty at Professor or Associate Professor level with expertise not available within the Institute, the Board of Governors (on recommendations of the ACoFAR) can earmark a vacant position exclusively for external recruitment. k. Any promotion or enhancement of Pay Band or Grade Pay, already implemented by the Institute should be got reviewed/examined by the Board by a duly constituted Selection Committee immediately. Any increment paid over the beginning of the scale of Associate Professor to those Assistant Professors who did not complete 3 years, is to be recovered from future pay. l. The orders issued by the Ministry following the 6th Central Pay Commission provides minimum number of years of service to go to a higher AGP or a higher designation, e.g. 3 years from AGP Rs.6,000/to Rs.7,000/or from AGP Rs.7,000/to AGP Rs.8,000/etc. These are to be implemented only through the formal selection process. A formal Selection Committee (as per the NIT Act, 2007 and the Statutes of NITs) must examine the candidature and ensure that an enhancement is recommended on the strength of academic contribution expected of a faculty member of an Institution of National Importance. m. The minimum duration prescribed by the Pay Commission for eligibility to move to higher AGPs are applicable only to performing faculty delivering quality academic output. A faculty member, apart from satisfying the minimum duration requirement, must meet academic and related standards set out in Recruitment Rules before being considered by the Selection Committee. Actual selection will depend on academic (research, teaching, writing and academic administration) performance. A faculty member, apart from satisfying the minimum duration requirement, must meet academic and related standards set out in Recruitment Rules before being considered by the Selection Committee. Actual selection will depend on academic (research, teaching, writing and academic administration) performance. n. The eligibility criteria (number of years in lower AGP) should be seen as necessary but not sufficient condition for upgradation of AGP or change of designation. Any upgradation can be done only on recommendation of a duly constituted Selection Committee after formal interview. The process for AGP upgradation should be as serious and dignified as that for change of designation. A candidate must convince the Selection Committee that he or she engaged in scholastic pursuits (teaching, research and management) to deserve an upgradation after his/her last advancement. o. Existing faculty members without Ph.D. degree must direct (at least 50% of their time during semester days) and during vacations and holidays towards completing their Ph.D. A faculty member without Ph.D. will not earn any enhancement of AGP, unless he acquires a Ph.D degree. The Directors of NITs may ensure that such faculty members are reasonably free from non academic duties to ensure that their Ph.D gets completed before they are considered for enhanced AGP. A concerted effort must be made to make all faculty members of all NITs obtain Ph. D. degrees. p. In case of upgradation of AGP of Professors to HAG scale, personal interview shall be dispensed with. The Selection Committee constituted as per the Statutes for the selection of Faculty, shall make their recommendations on the strength of published work, patents, sponsored projects, consultancy, continuing and distance education, Ph.D. guidance and contribution to the administration of the Institute, including service in other comparable institutions if on sanctioned leave, etc as submitted by the candidates. q. All Institutes shall strive to conduct annual selection processes regularly. In case of Institutes that have not conducted CAS interviews for 3 years or more, Selection Committees may, as a onetime measure, examine scholastic contribution of internal candidates made after the last interview and recommend a salary and AGP they would have earned now, had the Selection Committee met at the appropriate time. r. A copy of the RRs(including the relevant performance criteria for different posts and AGPs) shall be made available to the members of the Selection Committees. r. A copy of the RRs(including the relevant performance criteria for different posts and AGPs) shall be made available to the members of the Selection Committees. Ministry of HRD shall, through an appropriate communication, brief the Visitor's nominees (in the Selection Committee) to guide the Selection Committees to adopt norms that are prevalent in other Institutes of National Importance. s. All NITs will be required to adopt the 4tier flexible faculty structure (presently operating in IITs, IIMs, IISERs and NITIE) within a time frame to be determined by Council of NITs. 6. In view of the above, it is requested that the above guidelines may be adopted by the respective BoGs so as to undertake promotion under CAS while adhering to the basic principles of Government rules & regulations and relevant instructions. In case, any further difficulties are noticed within one year of the issue of these guidelines the same may be placed before the Special Committee constituted by MHRD (vide order F.No.337/2011-TS.III dated 14th March, 2012) for a decision thereupon.” Even though in clause (l) above, it appears that the order issued by the Ministry has been so issued following the 6th Central Pay Commission providing minimum number of years of service to go to a higher AGP or a higher designation, i.e. 3 years from AGP Rs.6,000/to Rs.7,000/or from AGP Rs.7,000/to AGP Rs.8,000/etc. The upgradation is to be implemented only through the formal selection process. 18. Now, the BOG/NITA has taken decision to follow the years of experience as it has been provided in the 5th CPC norms and the guidelines of the MHRD by their communiqué dated 14.03.2012, but the BOG has not streamlined the cleavage between the two standards. If the guidelines as prescribed by the MHRD order/communiqué dated 14.03.2012, the clause (l) would be in contrast to the prescription of the AICTE by their communication dated 10.09.2003 (Annexure-R/9 to the counter affidavit), which has been adopted by the office memorandum dated 17.08.2004 (Annexure R/10 to the counter-affidavit). In order to remove the anomalies arising out of the implementation of Sarangi Committee recommendations, the MHRD by their order/communiqué under No.F.33-71/2011-TS-III dated 18.03.2013, had further provided as under : “This Ministry had received several representations from the faculty/Teacher's Welfare Associations and others consequent upon the implementation of various recommendations of Sarangi Committee on pay anomalies and Career Advancement Scheme. In order to remove the anomalies arising out of the implementation of Sarangi Committee recommendations, the MHRD by their order/communiqué under No.F.33-71/2011-TS-III dated 18.03.2013, had further provided as under : “This Ministry had received several representations from the faculty/Teacher's Welfare Associations and others consequent upon the implementation of various recommendations of Sarangi Committee on pay anomalies and Career Advancement Scheme. These representations along with the recommendations of Sarangi Committee on various issues relating to guidelines on CAS, Model Recruitment Rules etc. were discussed in the meetings of Special Committee headed by Special Secretary(TE), MHRD held on 10.01.2012 and AS(TE) on 2.1.2013. After detailed deliberations following decisions have been taken : (i) Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) was in operation in institutions under guidelines provided by AICTE & UGC. However, it was made clear that those norms and procedures are not applicable to NITs. As a special case, institutes that have not considered CAS for 3 years or longer were allowed to do so as a onetime measure. (ii) The Ministry reiterates the decision of the NIT Council [3rd meeting, item No. 317] to adopt Flexible 4tier faculty cadre structure by way of resolution by the respective Board of Governors of all NITs with a compliance report to be sent by them to the Ministry by 30th April, 2013. As directed vide Ministry's order No. F. No.23-1/2000/TS.II dated 18.08.2009, the Ministry will put up the selection norms for various positions under the 4tier flexible faculty cadre structure by 30th April, 2013. (iii) the Council of NITS had permitted CAS only as a onetime measure. No permission shall be granted for conducting selection under CAS in any Institute w.e.f. 30.04.2013 as the institutes have to adopt implementation of 4tire faculty cadre structure by the date after having received one time exemption for CAS. (iv) Since Ph.D. has become the basic qualification for entering into the "regular" faculty cadre in any grade, there shall be no Ph.D increment [for those who are already holding regular faculty positions with lower qualifications] as already decided by the Council [3rd meeting item No.3.18] There shall, however , be no roll back nor recovery of payments already made. The earlier orders from the Ministry dated 09.03.2010 stands modified and is annexed. The earlier orders from the Ministry dated 09.03.2010 stands modified and is annexed. (v) As provided in the Clause 14(i) of Statutes, "the BoGs have the power to fix on the recommendation of the Selection Committee the initial pay of an incumbent at a stage higher than the minimum of the scale in respect of posts to which the appointment can be made by the Board under the provision of the Act". The Directors who are integral to all Selection Committees, would ensure that initial salaries granted to all new recruits, and to existing faculty entering higher positions, are commensurate with the candidates experience and performance record and that no new anomaly are created by the recommendations of additional increments made by the Selection Committees. There has to be an effort to eliminate anomalies at the BoG level after exercising the powers as per statute. (vi) When selection committees are called upon to consider HAG scale for senior Professors, only eminent people already in HAG or comparable scale or pay, or fellows of national academics, be appointed to Selection Committees. vii) Since selection of staff both administrative, technical and academic (except Director NITs) is done by the Selection Committee of NITs with the approval of BoG, the anomalies related to the selection under CAS or, otherwise may be dealt at their level of the Board. 2. Directors of all NITs are requested to kindly adhere to these decisions strictly so that anomalies of the employees with regard to pay, recruitment, selection of faculties, HAG scales etc. are minimized. Action taken in this regard may kindly be communicated to this Ministry at the earliest.” 19. It would be apparent from the said order/communiqué dated 18.03.2013 (AnnexureP/6 to the writ petition) that the Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) was in operation in the institution under the guidelines provided by the AICTE & UGC. It has been made clear that those norms and procedures are not applicable to the NITs. As a special case, the institutions that have not considered CAS for three years or longer were allowed to do so as a onetime measure. It has been further explained that the NIT Council decided to adopt a 4tier flexible faculty cadre structure by 30.04.2013. In view of that the said order/communiqué dated 18.03.2013 has provided that the Council of NITs had permitted CAS only as a onetime measure. It has been further explained that the NIT Council decided to adopt a 4tier flexible faculty cadre structure by 30.04.2013. In view of that the said order/communiqué dated 18.03.2013 has provided that the Council of NITs had permitted CAS only as a onetime measure. No permission shall be granted for selection under CAS in any institute w.e.f. 30.04.2013 as the institutes have to adopt implementation of 4tier faculty cadre structure by the date after having received onetime exemption for CAS. For adopting the 5th CPC norms and the guidelines to the MHRD as communicated by the letter dated 14.03.2012 (AnnexureP/4 to the writ petition), the respondents have asserted that the minimum experience to be eligible for consideration is 5 years for those having ME/M.Tech degree and 4 years for those with Ph.D degree. 20. There cannot be any amount of dispute that the petitioners No. 1 and 2 do not have the Ph.D, but the petitioner No.3 has got the Ph.D. According to the criterion of experience the petitioners No. 1 and 2 have to have five years experience for having the eligibility for consideration under CAS. According to the respondents, they do not have the said experience and as a result they are declared ineligible. But, the question that the respondents failed to answer is, how the private respondents who are appointed on the same date or thereafter had the required experience on the date when the selection committee scrutinised the records i.e. on 22.04.2013, as would be evident from the Note No.19 (AnnexureR/2 to the counter affidavit). The respondents have failed to explain that situation. They even did not furnish additional information in this regard. It appears now that the eligibility criterion was applied with discrimination without any reasonable basis and uniformity in terms of the 5th CPC norms or the guidelines of MHRD dated 14.03.2012 (AnnexureP/4 to the writ petition). This court is thus of the considered opinion, if according to the respondents No. 1 to 4, the consideration of the respondents Nos. 5 to 14 is not irregular or faulty in terms of the prescribed norms and guidelines then there cannot be any justifiable ground to declare the petitioners ineligible for consideration inasmuch as no additional information or ground has been disclosed by those respondents in their counter affidavit or in the selection proceeding records, as placed before this court. 5 to 14 is not irregular or faulty in terms of the prescribed norms and guidelines then there cannot be any justifiable ground to declare the petitioners ineligible for consideration inasmuch as no additional information or ground has been disclosed by those respondents in their counter affidavit or in the selection proceeding records, as placed before this court. If the petitioners were discarded after consideration following the prescribed norms or guidelines as provided by the MHRD by their order/communiqué dated 14.03.2012, their action to some extent could have been intelligible, but the way the action has been taken, it has failed to survive the test of reasonableness. It is grossly arbitrary and discriminatory in nature as the classification is patently unreasonable and hence it is liable to be interfered with. 21. The respondents No. 1 to 4 are directed to reconsider the eligibility of the petitioners vis-a-vis the experience of the respondents No. 5 to 14 and make the appropriate recommendation for their upgradation under CAS from AGP Rs.6,000 to AGP Rs.7,000 if they are found fit for such upgradation on assessment of performance. Such exercise shall be completed within a period of 2(two) months from today and for this matter, the prohibition as imposed by the MHRD, that cases of CAS should not be considered after 30.04.2013, shall not create any bar. If it is found that the proforma respondents were also not eligible then on taking a uniform view of the matter the official respondents No. 1 to 4 shall take appropriate action so that in no manner, even in terms of the pecuniary advantage, the petitioners are not discriminated. If following the experience of the respondents No. 5 to 14, it is found that the petitioners are as well eligible for consideration of upgradation under CAS, in the same terms as has been provided to the respondents No. 5 to 14, the petitioners shall also be given the benefit from the date when the said benefit has been released or extended to the respondents No. 5 to 14. 22. With this observation and direction, this petition stands allowed to the extent as indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs. Records so produced shall be returned under a sealed cover to Mr. B. Majumder, learned counsel appearing for the respondents No. 1 to 4.