JUDGMENT : Michael Zothankhuma, J. Heard, Mr. J. C. Lalnunsanga, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 1 & 2. 2. The petitioners' case in brief is that the petitioner has not been given his arrear pay as per pay fixation given in the Order dated 29.9.2011, issued by the Registrar of the Mizoram University. The second prayer of the petitioner is for a direction to the respondents to count the past service of the petitioner for promotion/entitlement of the benefits of the Professor Stage VI/Higher Academic Grade (HAG) pay scale under Career Advancement Scheme (CAS). 3. The petitioners' counsel submits that while serving as Professor in the Department of Radiology at Kasturba Medical College, Manipal University, the petitioner was offered appointment to the post of Professor in Department of Zoology in Mizoram University, hereinafter referred to as "MZU", vide letter dated 2.1.2007. The petitioners' counsel submits that as per the offer of appointment given to the petitioner, the pay of the petitioner was to be protected in the UGC scale. He submits that the petitioner was appointed in the Department of Zoology, Mizoram University vide Order dated 22.8.2007 in the pay scale of Rs. 16,400-450-20900-500-22,400 plus usual allowances as admissible under Mizoram University, w.e.f. 19.2.2007. 4. The petitioners' counsel submits that the Mizoram University thereafter issued a statement of fixation of pay under the CCS (revised pay) Rules, 2008 on 13.5.2009, which showed the petitioners' service emoluments as per the 6th pay Commission was Rs. 48,870/-, plus grade pay of Rs. 10,000/-. 5. The Mizoram University thereafter issued another statement of fixation of pay under the CCS (revised pay) Rules, 2008 on 4.8.2009, showing the petitioners' pay scale as Rs. 43,000/-, plus grade pay of Rs. 10,000/-. 6. The Registrar of the Mizoram University thereafter issued Order dated 29.9.2011 showing the re-fixation of the petitioners' pay scale as per the decision of Pay Anomaly Committee of the Mizoram University. The Order dated 29.9.2011 is reproduced below:- “ORDER As per decision of the Pay Anomaly Committee of Mizoram University which was approved by the 29th E.C. meeting held on 15.7.2011 vide resolution No. 29:5 (27) the pay of Prof. Ganesh Chandra Jagetia Deptt. Of Zoology is refixed at Rs. 46,050 + 10,000 = Rs. 56,050 in the PB - 4 -31,400 67,000 + AGP 10,000 as on 19.2.2007. Ganesh Chandra Jagetia Deptt. Of Zoology is refixed at Rs. 46,050 + 10,000 = Rs. 56,050 in the PB - 4 -31,400 67,000 + AGP 10,000 as on 19.2.2007. Accordingly his pay is regulated as below 19.2.2007 Rs. 46,050+10,000 = Rs. 56,050 1.7.2008 Rs. 47,740+10,000 = Rs. 57,740 1.7.2009 Rs. 49,480+10,000 = Rs. 59,480 1.7.2010 Rs. 51,270+10,000 =Rs. 61,270 1.7.2011 Rs. 53,110+10,000 = Rs 63,110 DNI 1.7.2012 This order supersedes this Office Pay fixation statement dt. 4.8.2009." 7. During the proceedings of the present case, the petitioner has been given his arrear pay as per the pay fixation given in the order dated 29.09.2011. Accordingly, the only question that is left to be decided by this Court is with regard to the petitioner's prayer for counting his past service as Professor in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, for the purpose of promotion to HAG pay scale under Career Advancement Scheme (CAS). 8. The petitioners' second limb of argument is with regard to the counting of his past service for the purpose of promotion to Professor stage-VI/Higher Academic Grade (HAG) pay scale. 9. The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner's past service as Professor in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal should be counted for promotion to Professor Stage-IV/HAG pay scale, as the petitioner's pay as Professor in Kasturba Medical College was to be/has been protected in the UGC pay scale, as can be seen from the letter dated 02.01.2007 and the appointment Order dated 22.8.2007, issued by the Registrar of the Mizoram University. The petitioners' counsel submits that as the fixation of the initial pay of the petitioner was Rs. 20,000/- as per the appointment Order, while the pay scale of Professor in MZU was Rs. 16,400-450-20,900-500-22,400/-, the same went to show that the respondents had accepted the payment of 8th increments to the petitioner at the time of his initial appointment as Professor in MZU. He submits that the MZU cannot be allowed to do away with the past service rendered by the petitioner in a private deemed University, i.e. Manipal University, in which the petitioner had worked for 25 years, by saying that the petitioner's service could be counted only for the period the petitioner worked in a recognized Central University, i.e. MZU. He submits that the MZU cannot be allowed to do away with the past service rendered by the petitioner in a private deemed University, i.e. Manipal University, in which the petitioner had worked for 25 years, by saying that the petitioner's service could be counted only for the period the petitioner worked in a recognized Central University, i.e. MZU. The petitioner's counsel submits that the petitioner's service in Manipal University was in conformity with the UGC norms and as such, the respondent University cannot discriminate against the petitioner by not counting his past service in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal as a Professor, for the purpose of promotion to the post of Professor (Stage-VI) HAG pay scale. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner made an application on 25.02.2011 for promotion to the HAG pay scale under CAS on the ground that he had completed the qualifying service of 10 years as a Professor and as per Regulation 6.4.10 of the UGC Regulation 2010. He submits that as the petitioner had been promoted to the post of Professor in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal on 01.03.1991 and had subsequently been appointed as Professor in MZU vide order dated 22.08.2007 w.e.f. 19.02.2007, the petitioner should have been promoted to the HAG pay scale with effect from the year 2010 as per the UGC Regulation, 2010, which came into force on 30.06.2010. The petitioner has accordingly prayed for promotion to Professorship (stage 6) on the ground that he already has 10 years of service as Professor in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal prior to joining MZU as per paragraph 6.4.10 of the UGC Regulation, 2010. 11. Mr. A.R. Malhotra, learned counsel for the MZU submits that the petitioner's case was considered by the 41st Executive Council Meeting held on 22.02.2015 and the counting of past service of the petitioner could not be granted, as his appointment as Professor in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal was based on the provisions laid down in the Manipal University Regulation, which were not in conformity with the UGC Regulations. Also, Manipal University was recognized as a deemed University by the UGC only on 01.06.1993 and even if it is assumed that the petitioner's promotion as Professor in KMC was as per the UGC Regulation, 1982, the service of the petitioner as regular Professor cannot be counted prior to 01.06.1993 . 12. Also, Manipal University was recognized as a deemed University by the UGC only on 01.06.1993 and even if it is assumed that the petitioner's promotion as Professor in KMC was as per the UGC Regulation, 1982, the service of the petitioner as regular Professor cannot be counted prior to 01.06.1993 . 12. The respondents' counsel also submits that the petitioner's service as Professor in Kasturba Medical College cannot be counted for the purpose of promotion to the higher grade of Professorship (stage 6) on the ground that he had not completed 10 years experience in teaching at the time he was promoted to Professor in Kasturba Medical College (KMC in short). Accordingly, the service of the petitioner as Professor in Kasturba Medical College was not regular service, as the qualification of the petitioner as Professor in KMC was not in accordance with the UGC Regulation of 1982. Thus, only the service rendered by the petitioner in MZU as Professor would have to be counted for promotion to Professorship (stage-6)/HAG. 13. I have heard the learned counsels for the parties. 14. Paragraph 6.4.10 of the UGC Regulation, 2010 provides that a Professor (Stage 5) in a University will be eligible for promotion to the higher grade of Professor (Stage 6), if he/she has a minimum of 10 years of teaching and research experience as Professor and on satisfying the required API scores. It may be mentioned that the petitioner has been working in the MZU as a Professor w.e.f. 19.02.2007 and the petitioner has retired from service on 31.08.2017 without being promoted to Professor (Stage-VI). The grievance of the petitioner is that he should have been promoted to Professor Stage-VI from the date the UGC Regulation, 2010 came into force, i.e. 30.06.2010. Para 6.4.10 of the UGC Regulation, 2010 states as follows: "6.4.10. Ten percent of the positions of Professors in a University, with a minimum of ten years of teaching and research experience as Professor either in the pre-revised scale of Professor's pay or the revised scale pay will be eligible for promotion to the higher grade of Professorship (stage 6), on satisfying the required API score as per Tables I and II through the PBAS methodology stipulated in these Regulations through a duly constituted Expert Committee, and such teachers promoted to the higher grade shall continue to be designated as 'Professor'. As this AGP elevation for Professor is applicable to only university departments, additional credentials are to be evidenced by: (a) Post- doctoral research outputs of high standard; (b) Awards/honours/and recognitions; (c) Additional research degrees like D.SC., D.Litt., LID, etc, patents and IPR on products and processes developed/technology transfer achieved in the case of teachers in science and technology. The selection is to be conducted by the university by receiving duly filled PBAS proformas from eligible professors based on seniority, three times in number of the available vacancies in each faculty. In case the number of candidates available is less than three times the number of vacancies, the zone of consideration will be limited to the actual number of candidates available. The assessment process shall be through an Expert-Committee evaluation of all credentials submitted as stipulated in Table-II(A) of Appendix-III for teachers in University Departments. No separate interview need to be conduct for 6 category." 15. Para 10.1, (a)&(d) of the UGC Regulation, 2010 states that previous regular service as Professor or equivalent in an University, College or other Scientific/Professional Organization should be counted for direct recruitment and promotion under CAS of a Professor, provided that the essential qualification of the post held in the other University/College were not lower than the qualification prescribed by the UGC for Professor. Para 10.1, (a)&(d) of the 2010 UGC Regulations states as follows: "10.0. COUNTING OF PAST SERVICES FOR DIRECT RECRUITMENT AND PROMOTION UNDER CAS 10.1. Previous regular service, whether national or international, as Assistant Professor, Associate Professor or Professor or equivalent in a University, College, National Laboratories or other scientific/professional Organizations such as the CSIR, ICAR, DRDO, UGC, ICSSR, ICHR, ICMR, DBT, etc., should be counted for direct recruitment and promotion under CAS of a teacher as Assistant Professor, Associate Professor, Professor or any other nomenclature these posts are described as per Appendix III-Table No. II provided that: (a) The essential qualifications of the post held were not lower than the qualifications prescribed by the UGC for Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor as the case may be. (d) The concerned Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor should possess the same minimum qualifications as prescribed by the UGC for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor, as the case may be." 16. (d) The concerned Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor should possess the same minimum qualifications as prescribed by the UGC for appointment to the post of Assistant Professor, Associate Professor and Professor, as the case may be." 16. The UGC Regulation, 1982 stipulates that the minimum qualification for appointment to the post of Professor in Arts, Science, Social Science, Commerce & Management Studies is as follows: "An eminent scholar with published work of high quality actively engaged in research. About ten year's experience of teaching and/or research. Experience of guiding research at doctoral level." 17. A reading of Regulation 10.0. and 10.1(a)&(d) clearly shows that the petitioner's previous regular service as a Professor in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal can be counted for promotion under CAS, provided that the petitioner's service as Professor in Kasturba Medical College was regular service and the essential qualifications that he was holding as Professor in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal was not lower than the qualifications prescribed by the UGC for the post of Professor. As can be seen from the Certificate dated 12.02.2019 issued by the Dean of Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, the qualification required for the post of Professor in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal was 9 years teaching experience in the Medical College after obtaining Ph.D qualification, of which 4 years should be as Reader/Associate Professor. On the other hand, the UGC Regulation of 1982 required a candidate who was to be promoted to Professor, to have been an eminent scholar with published work of high quality actively engaged in research. He should also have "about 10 years" experience of teaching and/or research, besides having the experience of guiding research at doctoral level. 18. It is not disputed by the parties that the petitioner was working in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal, prior to his appointment as Professor in MZU, as follows: Assistant Professor 13.07.1982 to 28.02.1987 Reader 01.03.1987 to 28.02.1989 Associate Professor 01.03.1989 to 28.02.1991 Professor 01.03.1991 to 17.02.2007 19. The Mizoram University had made queries with regard to the petitioner's service in Manipal University and Manipal University has replied, stating that the petitioner's appointment as a Professor in Manipal University was in accordance with the prescribed procedure laid down in the regulations of the Manipal Univerisity. The Mizoram University had made queries with regard to the petitioner's service in Manipal University and Manipal University has replied, stating that the petitioner's appointment as a Professor in Manipal University was in accordance with the prescribed procedure laid down in the regulations of the Manipal Univerisity. The Dean of the Kasturba Medical College, Manipal has issued a Certificate dated 12.02.2019, which states that the qualification required to be appointed as Professor of Kasturba Medical College, requires the candidate to have 9 years teaching experience in a Medical College after obtaining Ph.D qualification of which 4 years shall be as Reader/Associate Professor. 20. In the present case, it appears that the petitioner has the experience of teaching and/or research in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal from 13.07.1982 till 28.02.1991, prior to being appointed as Professor, which is 8 years 7 months 15 days. The question is whether the petitioner's past regular service in Kasturba Medical College, which was considered/counted for promotion to Professor in Kasturba Medical College was in consonance with the UGC Regulations, 1982. As stated earlier, Regulation 10 of the UGC Regulation, 2010 has provided for counting of past regular service for promotion of a Professor to Professor Stage VI/HAG under CAS. Accordingly, if the petitioner had the essential qualification for the post of Professor in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal as per the UGC Regulation of 1982, then his prior service as Professor in KMC can be counted for promotion to Professor Grade-VI/HAG in MZU. 21. The 41st Executive Council Meeting Minutes held on 20.2.2015 states as follows: "EC:41:5(2): Counting of Past Service for Promotion to HAG under CAS in respect of Prof. G.C Jagetia, Department of Zoology, Mizoram University. The Preliminary Screening Committee for promotion to HAG in respect of Prof. G.C Jagetia, Dept. of Zoology, MZU which met on 25.11.2014 was not able to conclude on his eligibility for promotion to HAG for want of clarify whether the eligibility criteria and pay scale while serving as Associate Professor and Professor at Manipal University conforms to those prescribed by UGC. Consequently, the Committee did not recommend counting of past service rendered by Prof. G.C Jagetia as Professor from 1991 onwards towards his promotion to Professor. HAG under CAS in this University. 1. Consequently, the Committee did not recommend counting of past service rendered by Prof. G.C Jagetia as Professor from 1991 onwards towards his promotion to Professor. HAG under CAS in this University. 1. The first Screening committee minutes was received on 04.10.2012, wherein, the Committee found that (i) his previous service was in a private constituent college of a private university (ii) The Professor did not apply through proper channel for the post of Professor in MZU (iii) Prof. G.C Jagetia's grade as a Professor in Kasturba Medical College was not an equivalent grade of the pre-revised scale of pay as the post of Professor prescribed by UGC. (iv) it is vague whether the selection for the post of Professor was done through duly constituted Selection Committee, Mizoram University sought clarification on his past service from Director, Manipal Life Science Centre, his previous employer, vide letter dated 07.11.2012." 2. Necessary documents were resubmitted by Prof. G. C. Jagetia on 28.05.2013 enclosing his application dated 04.12.2012. 3. University again sought clarification regarding past services of Prof. G.C. Jagetia, to Registrar, Manipal University on 11.06.2013. 4. On 11.07.2013, a letter was received from Registrar, Manipal University regarding the service matters of Prof. G.C. Jagetia, dated 08.07.2013, wherein, it was stated that Prof. G.C. Jagetia joined Kasturba Medical College Manipal w.e.f. 13.07.1982 and had since then served Manipal University in various capacities till February 17, 2007. He held a regular position of Professor at Manipal University since 01.03.1991 and that his appointment to the same post was based on recommendations of the Selection Committee in accordance to the prescribed procedure laid down on the regulations of the Manipal Unversity. 5. University again sought clarification from Registrar, Manipal University on 24.09.2013, regarding the same matter, as the letter dated 08.07.2013 did not clarify to the queries Mizoram University sought for. 6. Since no reply was received from Manipal University, clarification regarding the service matters of Prof. G.C. Jagetia was again forwarded on 29.04.2014. 7. Prof. G.C. Jagetia on dt. 27.10.2014 forwarded a letter received from Registrar, Manipal University, dated 13.10.2014 regarding the clarification on service in respect of Prof. G.C. Jagetia. The letter stated that his previous pay as well as his service periods was mentioned stating that the qualifications & experience required to hold the post of Professor as per the guidelines prescribed under Manipal University. His basic pay was Rs. G.C. Jagetia. The letter stated that his previous pay as well as his service periods was mentioned stating that the qualifications & experience required to hold the post of Professor as per the guidelines prescribed under Manipal University. His basic pay was Rs. 5,800/- per month in the prescribed scale of pay as on 01.04.1995. He was in the scale of pay of Rs. 19,500-25,700/- upto the year 2005 and 21,500-28,900 till his relief on resignation in February, 2007. Prof. G.C. Jagetia further enclosed an email dated 22.01.2007 sent by Shri Benjamin, the then Registrar of MZU, wherein it was stated that present pay shall be protected in UGC scale, counting of past services shall be possible as per usual provisions of central rules. The Council after detailed deliberation resolved that the past services of Prof. G.C. Jagetia cannot be taken into account for promotion to Professor HAG, since his appointment of Professor at Manipal University was based on the provisions laid down in the Regulations of Manipal University which are not in conformity with the UGC Guidelines/Regulations." 22. A perusal of the Meeting Minutes dated 20.02.2015 held in the 41st Executive Committee Meeting shows that the Executive Committee had come to a finding that the petitioner's past service as Professor in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal could not be counted for the purpose of promotion to Professor, HAG. No specifics have been given in the Executive Council Minutes to show whether the petitioner was not an eminent scholar or that he had not published works of high quality. It also does not say anything with regard to whether the petitioner fulfilled the requirement of "about 10 years" experience of teaching and/or research. The Executive Council Minutes has not stated anything specific with regard to whether the petitioner did/did not have any experience in guiding research at doctoral level. It has only come to a simple finding that the petitioner's past service cannot be counted for the purpose of promotion to Professor, HAG as the appointment of the petitioner as Professor in KMC was based on the Regulations of the Manipal University, which were not in conformity with the UGC Regulations, without any specifics being provided for the same in the Meeting Minutes. 23. 23. It is settled law that every action of an authority should be guided by reason and any decision taken without giving reason or justification for the same can be said to be arbitrary and in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. In the case of Oryx Fisheries Pvt. Ltd v. Union of India & Ors, (2010) 13 SCC 427 , the Apex Court has held that administrative authorities when making decisions must be informed of reason. 24. The above being said, one thing that clearly stands out while reading the qualification required for promotion to the post of Professor in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal and the UGC Regulation of 1982, is the fact that under the Kasturba Medical College, Manipal a person can be promoted to the post of Professor only after having 9 years teaching experience in a Medical College. On the other hand, as per the UGC Regulation of 1982, besides other requirements, for a person to be promoted as Professor, a candidate has to have "about 10 years" experience of teaching and/or research. 25. Thus, the question arises as to whether "about 10 years" experience means that a candidate has to have a minimum of 10 years experience. In this context, it will be profitable to refer to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Dr. Kumar Bar Das v. Utkal University, (1999) 1 SCC 453 , wherein an advertisement had been issued for filling up the vacant post of Professor of Economics (State Bank of India Chair). Clause 10 of the Advertisement, upon whose interpretation the entire case depends, reads as follows: "6. Soon after the creation of this endowment by the SBI, Utkal University advertised the post on 18-5-1987. Clause 10 of the advertisement, upon whose interpretation the entire case depends, reads as follows: "10. Essential qualifications (a) Professor. An eminent scholar with prescribed work of high quality, actively engaged in research. About ten years' experience of teaching and/or research and experience of guiding research at doctorol level OR An outstanding scholar with established reputation who has made significant contribution to knowledge. (b) Professor: SBI Chair (same as Professor) (c) * * *" 26. In the above case of Dr. About ten years' experience of teaching and/or research and experience of guiding research at doctorol level OR An outstanding scholar with established reputation who has made significant contribution to knowledge. (b) Professor: SBI Chair (same as Professor) (c) * * *" 26. In the above case of Dr. Kumar Bar Das (supra), the Apex Court was to decide whether the appellant, who had only 7 years 7 months and 14 days of teaching experience and research experience of 1 year 5 months and 14 days, total 9 years 26 days, could be said to have "about 10 years" experience of teaching and/or research. The Apex Court held that the total of 9 years 26 days of teaching and research experience cannot be said that it did not amount to "about 10 years", as the Selection Committee had earlier considered the appellant's teaching and research experience and had come to a decision that the same satisfied the condition of "about 10 years", when it recommended the appellant for the post of Professor. The Apex Court also held that "about 10 years" cannot be measured on the basis of a purely mathematical formula. It thus held that as "about 10 years" did not mean that a candidate required to have a minimum experience of 10 years, the appellant therein fulfilled the requirement of "about 10 years" of teaching and/or research experience. 27. In the present case, as the petitioner had teaching experience in Kasturba Medical Hospital since 13.07.1982 to 28.02.1991, prior being promoted to the post of Professor in Kasturba Medical College on 01.03.1991, the petitioner had 8 years 7 months 15 days experience of teaching. Keeping in view the judgment of the Apex Court in Dr. Kumar Bar Das v. Utkal University (supra), this Court is of the view that the petitioner's service, prior to becoming a Professor in Kasturba Medical College could be considered to be about 10 years. As such, the experience of the petitioner in teaching can be said to be "about 10 years". Assuming that the petitioner did not have "about 10 years" experience of teaching on 01.03.1991, when he was promoted to Professor in KMC, he surely had 10 years experience of teaching w.e.f. 12.07.1992. As such, the experience of the petitioner in teaching can be said to be "about 10 years". Assuming that the petitioner did not have "about 10 years" experience of teaching on 01.03.1991, when he was promoted to Professor in KMC, he surely had 10 years experience of teaching w.e.f. 12.07.1992. Also, as the Manipal University became a deemed University under the UGC on 01.06.1993, the petitioner's service as Professor under KMC would in any event, have to be regarded as regular service under the UGC Regulation of 1982 w.e.f 01.06.1993. Though, this Court does not have the wherewithal to come to a finding that the petitioner was a eminent scholar with published work of high quality actively engaged in research at doctoral level, as required under the UGC Regulation of 1982, the fact remains that the petitioner's pay as Professor of KMC was protected by the MZU, when he joined the MZU as Professor. This fact clearly implies that the MZU has accepted the petitioner's service under KMC to be the service of a regular Professor. The above clearly gives rise to an inference that the appointment of the petitioner as Professor in KMC was as per the UGC Regulations, if not on 01.03.1991, but surely from 01.06.1993. The MZU cannot be allowed to take a different stand at this juncture. 28. A reading of Regulation 10 of the UGC Regulation, 2010 clearly indicates that the past service of the petitioner in the Manipal University as Professor can be counted for the purpose of promotion to Professor Stage VI/HAG under CAS, if the essential qualifications of the post held by the petitioner, while being a Professor were not lower than the qualification prescribed by the UGC. As indicated in the foregoing paragraph, the MZU authorities have not give any specifics with regard to which part of the UGC Regulation, 1982 the petitioner did not possess. As such, the decision of the 41st Executive Committee Meeting Minutes held on 20.02.2015 along with the letter dated 30.03.2015 holding that the past service of the petitioner cannot be taken into account, for promotion to the post of Professor Stage VI/HAG cannot be accepted by this Court. 29. As such, the decision of the 41st Executive Committee Meeting Minutes held on 20.02.2015 along with the letter dated 30.03.2015 holding that the past service of the petitioner cannot be taken into account, for promotion to the post of Professor Stage VI/HAG cannot be accepted by this Court. 29. Ordinance OE-4(G) of the MZU Ordinance states as follows: (g) An applicant for the promotion under CAS shall be entitled to the benefit of regular and continuous previous service in the equivalent grade and scale of pay outside this university/institution like a university, college or other scientific organizations such as SCIR, UGC, ICAR, DRDO, ICSSR, ICHR, and other such institutions up to a maximum of half of the members of years required to be eligible for such promotion subject to the guidelines issued by UGC from time to time. 30. A perusal of the above Ordinance clearly shows that the petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of regular and continuous service in the equivalent grade and scale of Professor in Kasturba Medical College, up-to a maximum of half the number of years required to be eligible for such promotion. As the requirement of promotion to the post of Professor Stage VI/HAG requires a person to have a minimum of 10 years of teaching and research experience as Professor Stage-5, the petitioner's past service as Professor in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal for a period of 5 years, should also be considered along with his service under the MZU, for the purpose of promotion to the post of Professor, HAG. At this stage, it should also be kept in mind the fact that the petitioner has worked for more than 10 years as Professor in MZU prior to his retirement. Accordingly, as this Court has come to a finding that the petitioner's teaching experience and qualifications prior to being promoted as a Professor in Kasturba Medical College comes to "about 10 years" of experience, as required under the UGC Regulation of 1982, the petitioner's service as Professor in Kasturba Medical College, w.e.f 01.06.1993, can be considered to be regular service of a qualified Professor as per the UGC Regulation of 1982. Thus, for the purpose of promotion to Professor Stage VI/HAG, the 5 years teaching experience as Professor acquired by the petitioner in Kasturba Medical College, Manipal can also be added to the 5 years of experience the petitioner has obtained after being appointed as Professor in MZU, vide order dated 22.08.2007 w.e.f. 17.02.2007. In view of the reasons stated above, the petitioner can be considered for promotion to the post of Professor Stage VI/HAG from a period of 5 years to be counted from 19.02.2007, provided other requirements of the Regulation 6.4.10 of the UGC Regulation, 2010 are fulfilled. As to whether the petitioner has the qualification to be promoted to Professor Stage-VI, HAG, keeping in view the observations of this Court should decided by the expert body, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to place the petitioner's case before the Executive Committee, who shall consider/reconsider promoting the petitioner to Professor Stage-VI/HAG from a date he became eligible to be promoted by counting 5 years of his service as Professor of KMC and 5 years in MZU, provided the petitioner fulfills the other eligibility/qualifications required for being promoted. The respondents should also keep in mind the fact that the petitioner has in any event, completed 10 years of service as Professor in MZU prior to his retirement. The entire exercise for re-considering the case of the petitioner for promotion to the Professorship(Stage-6)/HAG pay scale shall be completed by the respondents within 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Consequently, the 41st Executive Committee Meeting Minutes held on 20.02.2015, in so far as it relates to the petitioner and the letter dated 30.03.2015 issued by the MZU are hereby set aside. The writ petition is accordingly allowed.