ORDER : 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner seeking for the following reliefs: “(i) That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to set-aside the impugned order dated 03.06.2016 (Annexure P/1) and direct the respondents to absorb the service of petitioner in the post of Assistant Professor Sociology from the date of absorption of identically placed other Assistant Professors of various subjects of respondent college along with equal benefits extended to them as regular government servant, without any financial loss to the petitioner in accordance with law. (ii) That, any other relief/order which may deem fit and just in the facts and circumstances of the case including award of the costs of the petition may be given.” 2. Brief facts of the case as projected by the petitioner are that, the petitioner was appointed as lecturer in department of Sociology in the Gramya Bharti Vidyapeeth, Hardi Bazaar Bilaspur, against the vacant and sanctioned post vide order dated 30.10.1983 in the pay scale of 700-1300-1600/- after following due process of selection enumerated in statute no. 28 known as College Code of the then Guru Ghasidas University Bilaspur. Accordingly the petitioner joined in 14.11.1983 under the provisions of C.G. Vishvavidyalaya Adhiniyam. Initially the petitioner was appointed on probation for period of 1 year however after completing the probation period of 1 year satisfactorily, the service of the petitioner was confirmed and became effective from the date of 14.11.1984. 3. The petitioner had passed his schooling in the year 1972 with more than 50%, B.Sc examination in the year 1975 with more than 50% marks, M.A. in the year 1977 in Sociology subject with 51.7%, M. Phil in the year 1978, B.Ed in the year 1980, LL.B in the year 1993, LLM in the year 2013 with 55.8% and also completed Ph.D in the year 1998. Apart from above qualifications the petitioner had conducted research projects funded by International Fund for Agriculture Development, a body of United Nations Organization, in association with Chhattisgarh Tribunal Development Society, a bonafide society of Chhattisgarh Government, also published research papers in National journals, guided Ph.D. students, acting as Chief Editor of research journal namely, Sociology Quest, Life member of Indian Sociology Society, executive member of Delhi and central zone Sociology Promotion Council and President of Chhattisgarh Sociological Association. 4. 4. After the confirmation of service the Guru Ghasidas Vishwavidyalaya had duly granted approval in accordance with law vide letter dated 19.09.1988. Vide order dated 07.02.1989, the Madhya Pradesh Uccha Shiksha Anudan Ayog had also granted approval of petitioner as regular Assistant Professor Sociology from 01.03.1988 for grant of aid. Accordingly, the petitioner is getting the pay scale fixed by the Directorate Madhya Pradesh Uccha Shiksha Anudan Ayog regularly and as on 01.09.1992, the petitioner was paid scale of Rs. 2200-4000/-. Thereafter, vide circular/order dated 08.07.1993, the M.P. Uccha Shiksha Anudan Ayog directed in accordance with Higher Education Department notification dated 03/08 November 1988, that the Assistant Professors appointed in approved colleges in regular basis after selection, after completing 8 years from 01.01.1986 shall be entitled to be promoted in senior pay scale of University Grants Commission of Rs. 3000-5000/-. Accordingly the petitioner was granted promotion in senior pay scale grade vide order dated 05.07.1994 with effect from March 1993. The pay scale of the petitioner was upgraded according to the recommendation of 5th Pay Commission in Rs. 12000-18300/-, by order dated 13.08.2004 effective from 27.07.1998. 5. Thereafter, the petitioner was included in the pay scale of Rs. 37400-67000 with AGP 9000 after applying recommendation of 6th pay commission from 01.01.2006 & Since then the petitioner is working with utmost sincerity & honesty up to the satisfaction of superior officers. Before absorption of Gramya Bharti Vidyapeeth, Hardi Bazaar, District Korba, total about 30 teachers, including aided, non-aided, regular, adhoc and contract were working in the college, however out of above 30, 17 regular Assistant Professors, librarian/Sports teacher were granted aid by the respondent state, therefore on proposal of the governing body of the college absorption process was initiated by the respondent state somewhere in the year 2006 and ultimately the cabinet of respondent state had granted its approval on 21.12.2012, for absorption of Gramya Bharti Vidyapeeth, Hardi Bazaar, District Korba in the Higher Education Department of Chhattisgarh and the formal order was issued on 19.09.2013 in the name of his Excellency The Governor absorbing the Gramya Bharti Vidyapeeth, Hardi Bazaar, District Korba, with the consent of Finance Department by its order dated 26.07.2013. 6. Though the absorption order was issued, but terms & conditions were mentioned to be prescribed later on in the order dated 19.09.2013 itself. 6. Though the absorption order was issued, but terms & conditions were mentioned to be prescribed later on in the order dated 19.09.2013 itself. From a bare perusal of order nowhere any whisper is seen regarding reversion of Cadre, Pay Scale and restrained from getting permanent post, Pension, Yearly Increment, Promotion, Revised Pay Scale and Pay Fixation. Thereafter on 23.05.2014, the setup of the respondent college was sanctioned and issued by the respondent state, whereby 1 post of Assistant Professor Sociology was sanctioned with pay scale of Rs. 15600-39100 with AGP of Rs. 6000. There is only 1 regular Assistant Professor working in sociology department with grant in aid by respondent state and that is the petitioner and apart from petitioner there is no other regular teacher is working under sociology department in respondent college, therefore from all angle the petitioner alone is entitled to claim absorption in the post of aforementioned sanctioned post of Assistant Professor Sociology in the respondent college with all consequential benefits of Government service. 7. On 23.05.2014, almost after 8 months of the merger order, the respondent state issued the terms & conditions of absorption, which has been added apart from the agreement executed between the Government and the Governing Body and made applicable upon the absorption of respondent college. In this order, it is prescribed that the Assistant Professors and other staffs have to submit an Affidavit with assurance that they have accepted all the terms & conditions prescribed in the agreement and as well as in Order dated 23.05.2014, failing which their services deemed to be dismissed from government service. In para 7 (C) of the order prescribes that the Employees/Officers not appointed in grant in aid posts shall be removed from services and the order shall be issued accordingly, meaning thereby all Employees/Officers appointed and working in posts for which grant in aid is approved and sanctioned by the respondent state shall be absorbed in the government service. From a bare perusal of order dated 23.05.2014 and agreement again it is apparent that no whisper with regard to reversion of Cadre, Pay Scale and restrained from getting permanent post, Pension, Yearly Increment, Promotion, Revised Pay Scale and Pay Fixation is mentioned. From a bare perusal of order dated 23.05.2014 and agreement again it is apparent that no whisper with regard to reversion of Cadre, Pay Scale and restrained from getting permanent post, Pension, Yearly Increment, Promotion, Revised Pay Scale and Pay Fixation is mentioned. On the contrary a compulsion was prescribed for executing affidavit by the employees accepting all the terms & conditions whether previously prescribed or later on failing which immediately the employee shall deemed to be dismissed from government service. 8. On 05.08.2014 a letter was issued by Joint Director Higher Education Department, Directorate, requiring appointment process, eligibility prescribed, eligibility hold by the petitioner at the time of appointment and the concerned documents from the Additional Director. Accordingly having no other option, being circumscribed and believing bonafidely upon the respondents the petitioner executed affidavit accepting all the terms & conditions of aforementioned absorption prescribed by the respondents and the governing body, without any consultation/information to the employees including the petitioner. Though the absorption order was passed on 19.09.2013, the petitioner continued as Assistant Professor Sociology in the respondent college and was waiting Pay Scale of Rs. 37400-67000 with AGP of Rs. 9000 Pay Scale, till March 2016 and told to get the same Pay Scale till May 2016. Shockingly and surprisingly vide impugned order dated 03.06.2016 the absorption order of petitioner along with 2 other assistant Professors was issued, absorbing their services in government service but as adhoc and temporary basis under dying cadre in basic salary of 15600 and AGP of Rs. 6000 and depriving them from the benefits of regular Government servant like regular yearly salary increment, regularization, promotion, pay fixation in revised pay scale etc. will not be granted to the petitioner on the basis that the petitioner is lacking in educational qualification and other terms of the absorption without disclosing the exact reason, that how the petitioner is lacking in educational qualification and other terms of the absorption and compelled the petitioner to execute an affidavit/promissory letter accepting all the terms & conditions of absorption. 9. In the same process identically placed other Assistant Professors of same college have been duly absorbed in the Government service with all consequential benefits. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of “K. GOPINATHAN v/s UNION OF INDIA” cited in (1992) 4 SCC 701 has categorically held that basic pay cannot be reduced. 10. 9. In the same process identically placed other Assistant Professors of same college have been duly absorbed in the Government service with all consequential benefits. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of “K. GOPINATHAN v/s UNION OF INDIA” cited in (1992) 4 SCC 701 has categorically held that basic pay cannot be reduced. 10. The petitioner was appointed vide order dated 30.10.1983 under the provisions Statue No. 28 of Guru Ghasidas Vishwavidhyalaya formulated under Section 35 of Chhattisgarh Vishvavidhyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973, whereby the eligibility for the post of Assistant Professor in any college was prescribed in the Statue No. 22 framed under Section 35(1) of Act, 1973 prescribing 2nd class master degree in concerned subjects as educational qualification which the petitioner is duly having by virtue of 57.1% in MA Sociology examination and also got 55.8% in LLM. Apart from that the petitioner has secured more than 50% in matriculation and graduation and having M. Phil degree, Ph.D degree in sociology subject, though the petitioner is willing to absorb his services in government service, however aggrieved by the finding of holding not eligible to the petitioner on the pretext of educational qualification and other terms of the absorption, rendering him disentitled for the benefits granted to the regular government servant. 11. In circular dated 06.07.1986 issued by the respondent department, it is prescribed that if a employee is not having educational qualifications or not fulfilling other terms of absorption then the said employee should be absorbed on the post in the basic pay in which he is getting at the time of absorption as dying cadre ad hoc employee though they will not be entitled for other benefits granted to the regular government servants. As per amendment published in the state gazette dated 05.02.2014 made in C.G. Education Service (Collegiate Branch) Recruitment Rules 1990, it is prescribed in Schedule 3 Clause 3 (two) that those Ph.D holders who have completed their Post Graduate degree before 19.09.1991 shall be entitled for 5% marks relaxation in Post-Graduation. Similar relaxation is prescribed in the University Grants Commission Guidelines which is enumerated below: “3.5.0 A relaxation of 5% may be provided, from 55% to 50% of the marks to the Ph.D degree holders, who have obtained their master's degree prior to 19th September, 1991.” 12. Similar relaxation is prescribed in the University Grants Commission Guidelines which is enumerated below: “3.5.0 A relaxation of 5% may be provided, from 55% to 50% of the marks to the Ph.D degree holders, who have obtained their master's degree prior to 19th September, 1991.” 12. Accordingly the said relaxation was prescribed in the advertisement dated 05.09.2014 published by the respondent C.G. Public Service Commission for appointment in the post of Assistant Professor in various subjects and the benefit is extended to all the eligible candidates. These aforementioned relaxations is applicable in the case of petitioner as he has passed his Post Graduation in Sociology subject in the year 1977 and having Ph.D. degree in Sociology subject in the year 1998, hence this petition. 13. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 03.06.2016 is bad in law, unreasonable, unauthorized, unwarranted, unauthorized, discriminatory, arbitrary, therefore hit by the postulates of Articles 14, 16 & 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioner was duly eligible to be appointed in the post of Assistant Professor as on 30.10.1983 and duly appointed after following due process of law under the prevailing law enumerated in statue No. 22 & 28 of Guru Ghasidas Vishvavidyalaya framed under powers of Section 35 of Act 1973. The petitioner was appointed against duly sanctioned and vacant post of Assistant Professor Sociology subject on the basis of his merit. Even today as per provisions of applicable Statutory Recruitment Rules, 1990, the petitioner is duly eligible to be appointed in the post of Assistant Professor Sociology subject as he had secured required marks in matriculation, graduation and post- graduation and also fulfills all other conditions. The petitioner is entitled for 5% marks relaxation at Post graduation level according to amendment in the Rules 1990, published in the State Gazette on 05.02.2014 on the ground of having Ph.D degree and completed post-graduation before 1991. The petitioner was duly promoted in the senior grade and in the selection grade after following due process of law and duly approved grant in aid from the Madhya Pradesh Uccha Shiksha Anudan Ayog and recently the petitioner is paid pay scale of Rs. 37400-67000, with AGP of Rs. 9000. 14. The petitioner was duly promoted in the senior grade and in the selection grade after following due process of law and duly approved grant in aid from the Madhya Pradesh Uccha Shiksha Anudan Ayog and recently the petitioner is paid pay scale of Rs. 37400-67000, with AGP of Rs. 9000. 14. The petitioner was duly appointed in the post of Assistant Professor Sociology after following due process of law by publishing advertisement and conducting selection process, which was duly approved by the Respondent University. The grant in aid was duly accorded to the petitioner by Madhya Pradesh Anudan Ayog and the benefit of 5th Pay Commission and 6th Pay Commission along with promotion in the post of senior grade and selection grade and at every stage the approval was duly accorded by the Madhya Pradesh Anudan Ayog after due verification, which is made the requirement of for absorption in Government Service. 15. The Hon’ble Supreme Court had held that the Salary/Pay Scale which the employee is getting cannot be reduced by way of Absorption, meaning thereby, no monetary loss can be conferred upon the absorbed employee while absorbing the employee by way of absorption in the government service. As per Circular dated 1986 also the absorbed employees are entitled for the same basic salary as he was getting before absorption. The other Assistant Professor of same respondent college are being absorbed with regular pay scale as regular employee and only the petitioner has been singled out on the basis of fancy and false ground. 16. The petitioner is serving as regular Assistant Professor in Sociology subject in the respondent college for more than last 33 years, with the regular pay scale along with all regular benefits accorded to the regular employees by the same authority and all of a sudden in the garb of absorption the petitioner is deprived from the benefits extended to the regular Government employees. The eligibility criteria is retrospectively applied, which is not permissible before the eyes of law. The impugned order is passed in utter violation of principles of natural justice without affording any proper opportunity to the petitioner behind his back. The impugned order is passed in utter violation of promissory estoppel and legitimate exception as the petitioner had altered his position to his detriment on the assurance of the respondent regarding absorbing his service in government service without any financial loss. 17. The impugned order is passed in utter violation of promissory estoppel and legitimate exception as the petitioner had altered his position to his detriment on the assurance of the respondent regarding absorbing his service in government service without any financial loss. 17. The order of absorption of respondent college was passed on 21.09.2013 but the terms and conditions were prescribed 8 months thereafter without disclosing the impugned conditions of impugned order with compelling clause of executing assurance letter with affidavit. No other option is left with the petitioner at the fag end of his career and only few years are left where the petitioner is being deprived of the benefits of Government Servant. 18. Learned counsel for the respondent No.2/University submits that the petitioner is an employee of the respondent no.3-College which was controlled and managed by the State Government through the department of Higher Education and there is a dispute between petitioner and respondent State Government. The respondent No.2/University is an autonomous body, which was initially established under the M.P. Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973 and by virtue of the Central Universities act, 2009, the respondent University was upgraded as Central University w.e.f. 15.01.2009, and now it is governed with the Central University Act 2009 and the statutes, ordinances and regulations made under the provisions of the said act. The petitioner unnecessarily arrayed the respondent No.2/University as respondent. There is no any cause of action was arose against the respondent No.2 and the contents of petition are being a matter between the petitioner and the respondent No.1 & 3, hence this petition is liable to be dismissed against the respondent No.2. 19. Learned counsel for the respondents No.1 & 3/State strongly opposed the prayer of the petitioner and submits that Gramya Bharti Vidyapeeth, Hardi Bazar, Korba was a private aided college, receiving grant-in- aid from the State Government and the petitioner joined services in such aided college on 16/08/1983, after following the process of selection by the college which was not a government college at the time, when the petitioner was recruited as Assistant Professor. 20. The said Gramya Bharti Vidyapeeth, Hardi Bazar, Korba was taken over by the Department of Higher Education, Government of Chhattisgarh w.e.f. 19/09/2013 as per Annexure R/1/1. 20. The said Gramya Bharti Vidyapeeth, Hardi Bazar, Korba was taken over by the Department of Higher Education, Government of Chhattisgarh w.e.f. 19/09/2013 as per Annexure R/1/1. In exercise of powers conferred by proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, the Madhya Pradesh Educational Services (Collegiate (Branch) Recruitment Rules, 1990 were notified on 31/08/1990 (Annexure R/1/2) and in compliance of the Rule 14(1) of the Rules, 1990, the Gramya Bharti Vidyapeeth, Hardi Bazar, Korba was taken over by the Government, since the aided private college was being taken over by the Department of Higher Education, Government of Chhattisgarh, the procedure of recruitment had to be unscrupulously adhered to. In adherence to the said Rule 14, a screening committee was constituted under the chairmanship of member of Chhattisgarh Public Service Commission. This committee acting as a screening committee, held its meeting on 27/12/2014. 21. Proceedings of the said committee is Annexure R/1/3. In proceedings of the said screening committee, certain persons were found to be suitable/fit for being absorbed for various posts, whereas certain persons were found to be unsuitable/unfit for being absorbed in the post held by them after absorption of the private aided college. The name of the petitioner finds mentioned in the list of persons found unsuitable by the screening committee constituted under Rule 14 of the Rules, 1990, therefore, upon the petitioner along with other persons being found unsuitable for being absorbed in regular government service after taking over of the private aided college by the Department of Higher Education, State of Chhattisgarh as described above, there was no other way to continue the services of such unsuitable persons including the petitioner than as per the provisions contained in Rule 14(ix) of the Rules, 1990, therefore, the petitioner like other persons unsuitable for absorption for regular government service as per the recommendation of the screening committee, have been continued on the post, they held on as a dying cadre and as per the relevant provisions of Rule 14, they would not get any benefit of seniority, promotion and annual increments and revision of pay scale even after their absorption. 22. 22. In addition to the Rules, 1990 (Annexure R/1), there are specific instructions from the Department of Higher Education which clearly states that in the event of taking over of a private aided college by the government and non-absorption of any person upon being found unsuitable for being absorbed in government service, such persons would be continued in the post held by them as dying cadre while being disbursed their basic pay, therefore, in the light of this Rule, the petitioner too is being paid the basic pay/entry level pay to which the petitioner is entitled for because as per the provisions of Rule 14 of the Rules, 1990, no other emoluments or higher service scale etc. can be given to a person who has been found unsuitable for being absorbed in regular government service after taking over of college by the Department of Higher Education of the State of Chhattisgarh. Therefore, this petition is without any merit and liable to be dismissed. 23. The petitioner filed his rejoinder along with Annexure P/21 and submits that an amendment was made on 13.06.2013 in Rules, 1990, but the same is applicable only for the post of Principal and not for the post of Lecturers/Assistant Professor. During the pendency of this writ petition one more college namely Arts and Commerce Girls Degree College, Devendra Nagar, Raipur was absorbed by respondent State and absorption of Assistant professors were made on the basis of Rules, 1990, specially Rule 14 read with Rules, 1967 and all Assistant Professors having second division master degree in concerned subject were declared eligible for absorption by the screening committee and accordingly absorbed as regular Government servant by the respondent State. Total 13 Assistant professors, 1 Librarian and 1 Sports Officer have got lesser qualification and percentage of marks than the petitioner, but found eligible applying different yardstick/interpretation of applicable 1967 and 1990 Rules and they all are enjoying the status of Government servant and getting salary and all other financial benefits accordingly and only the petitioner is singled out. Copies of meeting of screening committee is Annexure P/22. As such the return filed by the State is misleading. 24. The respondents did not file any rebuttal to the rejoinder filed by the petitioner. 25. I have heard the contentions put forth by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on the record. 26. Copies of meeting of screening committee is Annexure P/22. As such the return filed by the State is misleading. 24. The respondents did not file any rebuttal to the rejoinder filed by the petitioner. 25. I have heard the contentions put forth by learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on the record. 26. It is not disputed in this case that the petitioner is working since 1983 and his college- Government Gramya Bharti Vidyapeeth, Hardi Bazaar, Korba was taken over by the Higher Education Department, State of Chhattisgarh. The respondents filed minutes of meeting dated 27.12.2014 of Screening Committee (Annexure R/3). It is held in para 1 as under: 27. The Screening Committee found the petitioner unsuitable/unfit for being absorbed in the post held by him. It is written in para 5 as under : l-dz- vf/kdkjh dk uke inuke fo"k; lfefr dh vuq'kalk fjekdZ 2 MkW- ftrsUnz fd'kksj esgrk lgk;d izk/;kid lekt'kkL= vuqi;qDr LukrdksRrj mikf/k esa izFke Js.kh esa ugha gksus ls 28. The petitioner filed Annexure P/21 and P/22. Annexure P/22 is minutes of meeting of Screening Committee dated 04.09.2018, in which staff of Government Arts and Commerce Girls College, Devendra Nagar, Raipur were considered and it is clear that from tabulation sheet that some of professors at S.No. 4, 8, 11 and many other candidates having less marks from the petitioner, found suitable by the Screening Committee. The respondents did not rebutted these documents and did not file any document in rebuttal of Annexure P/21 and P/22. 29. The Hon’ble Supreme Court dealing with the similar issue in the matter of “K. GOPINATHAN v/s UNION OF INDIA” reported in (1992) 4 SCC 701 held in para 7 & 8 as under: “7. On these facts the Tribunal comes to the conclusion as follows: "In fact on the date of absorption, the dearness allowance available under the Tamil Nadu Government Pay Scales was only Rs. 279 for the applicant, whereas the amount of DA available to him under the Central scales was Rs. 518. It is also to be noted that out of Rs. 518, an amount of Rs 214.70 has been merged with the pay. 279 for the applicant, whereas the amount of DA available to him under the Central scales was Rs. 518. It is also to be noted that out of Rs. 518, an amount of Rs 214.70 has been merged with the pay. When the dearness pay of Rs 214.70 is added to the basic pay of Rs 390.00, we get the amount of Rs 604, which is higher than the basic pay of Government servant under the Tamil Nadu Government, attached to the post. We therefore hold that there has not been any reduction in the applicant's basic pay in substance, even though that basic pay consisted of two elements is different. Taking into account the fact that the Tamil Nadu Government scales were revised on April 1, 1978 and that of the Central Government on January 1, 1973, we are of the view that both the scales are not comparable. When a person is being governed by the Tamil Nadu Government pay scales while he was on deputation, and therefore as on February 1, 1983, is absorbed under Central scale of pay the diminution in basic pay of the applicant is bound to occur. We also notice that even though the basic pay of the applicant rose to Rs 604 from Rs 510 by virtue of the addition of the dearness pay of Rs 214.70 with the existing basic pay of Rs 390.00. Therefore, this is a case in which there has not been any real reduction in the basic pay of the applicant." 8. We are afraid we cannot subscribe to this reasoning. While upholding the view of Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in Original Application No. 1680 of 1989 in SLP (C) No. 2196 of 1992, we have pointed out how the basic pay cannot be reduced. The same principle will be applicable to this case as well. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.” 30. In view of the above, it is clear that other teachers and professors, who were having equal qualification to that of petitioner, are getting benefit of Government employee after absorption. It is also clear from Bharti Niyam, 1967 that at the time of appointment of petitioner, qualification as mentioned in schedule-Three is as under : ^^O;k[;krk& 21 o"kZ 25 o"kZ mikf/k egkfo