Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DIGILAW 344 (HP)

Bhagwan Singh Negi v. State of H. P.

2025-03-11

JYOTSNA REWAL DUA

body2025
JUDGMENT : (Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J.) Petitioner is serving as Lecturer (Public Administration) in Government Degree College, Reckong Peo, District Kinnaur. He is serving as such on Parent Teacher Association (‘PTA’) basis from 25.07.2005. Petitioner is also being paid grant-in-aid by the respondent-State under the Grant-in-Aid Rules, 2006. His grievance is that despite rendering almost 20 years of service, the respondent has not regularized his services till date; He is being discriminated viz-a-viz similarly situated lecturers, who were appointed on PTA basis. 2. The case may be summarized as under:- 2(i). As noticed above, petitioner is serving as Lecturer (Public Administration) in Government Degree College, Reckong Peo, District Kinnaur on PTA basis w.e.f. 25.07.2005. Grant-in-Aid Rules were promulgated by the respondents in the year 2006. A duly constituted PTA Committee, appointed the petitioner under the provisions of Grant-in-Aid Rules as Lecturer (Public Administration) on 19.08.2006. 2(ii). Grant-in-aid has been released to the petitioner by the respondent-State w.e.f. 07.05.2009. It is not in dispute that ever since the petitioner is being paid this grant-in-aid by the respondent. 2(iii). Petitioner’s case is that respondent-State formulated a Policy for regularization of PTA appointed Lecturers. In terms of this Policy, services of such PTA appointed Lecturers were regularized, who had completed 7 years of continuous service. In this manner, services of about 70 PTA appointed lecturers were regularized in different colleges under the notification dated 04.09.2020. The case of the petitioner was also required to be considered for regularization along with these persons. However, the respondent left out petitioner's case. His services have not been regularized. Feeling aggrieved, the petitioner instituted this writ petition seeking regularization w.e.f. 04.09.2020. 2(iv). The respondent has not disputed the fact that petitioner is serving as Assistant Professor (Public Administration) on PTA basis in Government Degree College, Reckong Peo, District Kinnaur and is in receipt of grant-in- aid under the GIA Rules 2006 w.e.f. 07.05.2009. The respondent has also not disputed the fact that under notification dated 04.09.2020, it had decided to regularize the services of such PTA appointed Lecturers, who had completed 7 years of continuous service. 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file. The respondent has justified not regularizing the services of the petitioner on the grounds that:- 3(a). 3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the case file. The respondent has justified not regularizing the services of the petitioner on the grounds that:- 3(a). The Department had regularized the services of only those PTA provided Lecturers, who had been engaged between 29.06.2006 to 03.01.2008, as per the PTA (GIA) Rules, 2006. According to the respondent, petitioner had been engaged prior to 29.06.2006, i.e. on 25.07.2005, therefore, his services cannot be regularized under notification dated 04.09.2020. 3(b). Petitioner did not fulfill requisite qualifications either at the time of his initial engagement or as per the Recruitment & Promotion Rules in vogue as on date. Hence, his services cannot be considered for regularization. 4. Consideration. 4(i). The first ground of defense taken by the respondent for not regularizing the services of the petitioner, is without any merit. Respondent has not disputed that petitioner was engaged on PTA basis as Lecturer (Public Administration) on 25.07.2005. This appointment was prior to coming into force of Grant-in-Aid Rules, 2006. Thereafter, a Committee duly constituted in terms of Grant-in-Aid Rules, 2006, again appointed the petitioner on PTA basis on 19.08.2006. It is also an admitted position that respondent is paying grant-in-aid to the petitioner under the Grant-in-Aid Rules, 2006, w.e.f. 07.05.2009. The release of grant-in-aid to the petitioner is for the obvious reason that respondent has treated petitioner’s appointment to be in conformity with the Grant-in-Aid Rules, 2006. That being the position, the respondent cannot be permitted to contend that petitioner having been engaged prior to 29.06.2006, is not entitled to be considered for regularization. 4(ii). The second ground of defense taken by the respondent concerns petitioner’s alleged non-possession of requisite educational qualification either at the time of his initial engagement or as per Recruitment & Promotion Rules in place at present. 4(ii)(a). Learned Deputy Advocate General invited attention to the Recruitment & Promotion Rules for the post of Assistant Professor, College Cadre, Class-I (Gazetted) in the respondent-Education Department, notified on 27.03.2018 appended by the respondent along with their reply. The minimum educational and other qualification required for direct recruit(s), have been prescribed in Column No.7 of these Rules. Learned Deputy Advocate General has pressed following Rule 7(vii) of the aforesaid Recruitment & Promotion Rules:- “(vii) NET/SLET shall remain the minimum eligibility condition for recruitment and appointment of Assistant Professor in Universities / Colleges /Institutions. The minimum educational and other qualification required for direct recruit(s), have been prescribed in Column No.7 of these Rules. Learned Deputy Advocate General has pressed following Rule 7(vii) of the aforesaid Recruitment & Promotion Rules:- “(vii) NET/SLET shall remain the minimum eligibility condition for recruitment and appointment of Assistant Professor in Universities / Colleges /Institutions. Provided that the award of degree to candidates registered for the M.Phil/Ph.D programme prior to July 11, 2009, shall be governed by the provisions of the then existing Ordinances/ Byelaws/Regulations of the Institutions awarding the degree and the Ph.D candidates shall be exempted from the requirement of NET/SLET/SET for recruitment and appointment of Assistant Professor or equivalent position in Universities/Colleges/Institutions subject to the fulfilment of the following conditions:- a) Ph.D degree of the candidate awarded in regular mode only; b) Evaluation of the Ph.D thesis by at least two external examiners: c) Open Ph.D viva voce of the candidate had been conducted; d) Candidate has published two research papers from his/her Ph.D work out of which at least one must be In a refereed journal; e) Candidate has made at least two presentations in conferences / seminars, based on his / her Ph.D work. (a) to (e) as above are to be certified by the Vice- Chancellor/ Pro-Vice Chancellor/Dean (Academic Affairs)/Dean (University instructions).” Learned Deputy Advocate General submits that since the petitioner did not possess and still does not satisfy prescribed National Eligibility Test (‘NET’)/State Level Eligibility Test (‘SLET’) criteria, therefore, he cannot be considered for the regularization of his services, being not in possession of requisite educational criteria. 4(ii)(b). Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has drawn attention to the proviso to the above extracted Rule 7(vii). As per the proviso to the Rule 7(vii), the award of degrees to candidates registered to M.Phil/Ph.D. programme prior to 11.07.2009, would be governed by the provisions of then existing Ordinances/Bye-laws/ Regulations of the Institutions awarding the degree. Further, a Ph.D. candidate is exempted from the requirement of NET/SLET/SET for recruitment and appointment of Assistant Professor or equivalent position in Universities/ Colleges/Institutions. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had obtained M.Phil. Degree in May, 2009, therefore, he falls within the exemption criteria as laid down under proviso to Rule 7(vii). Further, a Ph.D. candidate is exempted from the requirement of NET/SLET/SET for recruitment and appointment of Assistant Professor or equivalent position in Universities/ Colleges/Institutions. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner had obtained M.Phil. Degree in May, 2009, therefore, he falls within the exemption criteria as laid down under proviso to Rule 7(vii). It was also argued that respondent has applied the exemption criteria in cases of several other similarly situated PTA appointed Lecturers, who were in possession of M.Phil. Degree prior to 11.07.2009 by regularizing their services under notification dated 04.09.2020. That the respondent has adopted the same criteria while making regular recruitment, i.e. those in possession of M.Phil. Degree prior to 11.07.2009 have been exempted from NET/SLET/SET and their services have been regularized. Attention was also drawn to Annexure P-6 appended along with CMP No.17214 of 2024. This document was taken on record under order dated 04.11.2024. As per Annexure P-6, the respondent-Department had proposed for regularizing the services of the petitioner, in view of his having obtained M.Phil. Degree in May 2009, i.e. prior to the cut off date of 11.07.2009. 5. The respondent has not disputed the factual position asserted by the petitioner that he is being discriminated viz-a-viz similarly situated PTA appointed Lecturers, whose services have been regularized under notification dated 04.09.2020 and who were in possession of only M.Phil. Degree prior to the cut off date of 11.07.2009. However, details of those persons are not available on record of the case. Though there is merit in the contentions of the petitioner, however, the allegations touching factual aspects of the case that petitioner has been discriminated with similarly situated persons viz-a-viz imposition of condition of qualifying NET/SET etc. despite having M.Phil. Degree prior to 11.07.2009 needs to be examined by the respondent. Accordingly this petition is allowed to the extent that the respondent is directed to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization in accordance with Recruitment & Promotion Rules (Annexure R-1), in particular Clause 7(vii) and proviso thereof, and also keeping in view the regularization cases of other similarly situated PTA appointed Lecturers, who were in possession of M.Phil. Degree prior to 11.07.2009. This exercise be carried out within four weeks. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioner. Degree prior to 11.07.2009. This exercise be carried out within four weeks. The order so passed be also communicated to the petitioner. In case the petitioner is found to be similarly situated, as the others, he shall be granted same consequential benefits in lieu of his regularization as granted to other similarly situated persons. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any.