JUDGMENT : (N. NAGARESH, J.) The petitioners, who are working as Assistant Professor Grade II / Lecturer (Senior Scale) in the MES College, Marampilly, Aluva, seek to quash Ext.P7 communication of the 2 nd respondent and to direct the 2 nd respondent to approve the placement of the petitioners as Lecturer (Selection Grade) with effect from the dates mentioned in Exts.P3, P4 and P5 with consequential benefits. 2. Petitioners 1 to 3 were appointed as Lecturers on 17.10.1996, 22.03.1999 and 24.03.1999 respectively. The petitioners possess B.Tech Degree in Computer Science and Electronics. The petitioners acquired M.Tech Degree in June, 2011. After completing six years of service, the petitioners were promoted as Lecturer (Senior Scale) as per the 5 th UGC Pay Revision Order with effect from 17.10.2002, 22.03.2005 and 24.03.2005 respectively. 3. The petitioners state that as per Ext.P1 UGC Notification on Revision of Pay Scales, Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers in Universities and Colleges and other Measures for the Maintenance of Standards, 1998, Lecturers in Senior Scale will be placed in the Selection Grade subject to the recommendations of the Selection Committee. The Lecturers (Selection Grade) can offer themselves for fresh assessment after obtaining PhD and/or fulfilling other requirements for promotion as Reader and, if found suitable, could be given the designation of Reader. As per Clause 7.4.1 of Ext.P1, a Lecturer (Senior Scale) who has completed five years of service can be placed as Lecturer (Selection Grade). 4. The petitioners state that they completed five years of service as Lecturers (Senior Scale) on 17.10.2007, 22.03.2010 and 24.03.2010 respectively and became eligible for placement as Lecturer (Selection Grade). Later, pursuant to Ext.P2 judgment in W.P.(C) No.32981/2014, the petitioners were placed as Lecturer (Senior Scale), as per Exts.P3 to P5 placement orders issued in the year 2007 and 2010. 5. In the meanwhile, UGC 6 th Pay Revision Order came into force whereunder there is no Senior Scale or Selection Grade. The 6 th Pay Revision provided for Assistant Professor Grade-I, Grade-II and Grade-III. The 6 th Pay Revision came into force as per GO dated 27.03.2010. The Government later issued Ext.P6 GO dated 10.12.2010 holding that Lecturers, who are eligible for placement in Selection Grade prior to 17.09.2010, can claim the benefits of 5 th Pay Revision. Therefore, the petitioners are eligible for placement in Selection Grade on 17.10.2007, 22.03.2010 and 24.03.2010. 6. The 6 th Pay Revision came into force as per GO dated 27.03.2010. The Government later issued Ext.P6 GO dated 10.12.2010 holding that Lecturers, who are eligible for placement in Selection Grade prior to 17.09.2010, can claim the benefits of 5 th Pay Revision. Therefore, the petitioners are eligible for placement in Selection Grade on 17.10.2007, 22.03.2010 and 24.03.2010. 6. When the placement orders of the petitioners in Selection Grade were forwarded to the University, the University rejected the same holding that they are now governed by 6 th Pay Revision Order and subsequent 7 th Pay Revision Order. 7. The petitioners state that similarly placed Lecturers were granted placement under Selection Grade and such grant was approved by the University, as can be seen from Ext.P8 order granting placement to one Sri. Murugan. One Sri. Joseph Deril K.S. was granted the benefit as per Ext.P9 order. There are a number of Associate Professors who are given placement as Lecturer (Selection Grade) since they became eligible for the said placement prior to 17.09.2010. The petitioners' request was, however, rejected. 8. The 1 st respondent resisted the writ petition filing a statement dated 25.02.2025. The 1 st respondent stated that the Principal of the petitioners' College submitted the proposal for placement of the petitioners in Lecturer (Selection Grade) on 13.06.2023. The service records of the petitioners were submitted to the University on 24.08.2023. On verification of service records, it was noted that the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education has revised the pay and the designation of the petitioners as per the 6 th UGC Pay Revision based on the form of option submitted by the petitioners. The petitioners were required to resubmit the fixation statement and other required documents with the pay and designation as per 6 th UGC Regulation. 9. The petitioners, however, submitted a complaint dated 12.09.2023 seeking to approve their placement as Lecturer (Selection Grade) based on 5 th UGC Regulation. On 30.01.2024, the petitioners submitted another application to the University to reconsider the decision communicated by the University. The University decided to seek the opinion of the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education, Ernakulam on the above matter. 10. The Deputy Director of Collegiate Education revised the pay and designation of the petitioners as per 6 th UGC Pay Revision based on the Form of Option submitted by the petitioners. The University decided to seek the opinion of the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education, Ernakulam on the above matter. 10. The Deputy Director of Collegiate Education revised the pay and designation of the petitioners as per 6 th UGC Pay Revision based on the Form of Option submitted by the petitioners. The designation of the petitioners was changed from Lecturer (Senior Scale) to Assistant Professor (15600 – 39100 with AGP 7000) on the date of placement of the petitioners. The proposal for the placement of the petitioners was on submitting revised fixation statement and other documents. 11. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 1 and 2. 12. Petitioners 1 to 3 were appointed as Lecturer on 17.10.1996, 22.03.1999 and 24.03.1999 respectively. On completion of three years, as per the 5 th Pay Revision Order, they were placed in Lecturer (Senior Scale) with effect from 17.10.2002, 22.03.2005 and 24.03.2005 respectively. On completion of a further service of five years, the petitioners were entitled to be placed in the Lecturer (Selection Grade) with effect from 17.10.2007, 22.03.2010 and 24.03.2010 respectively. It is evident from the pleadings that the placement of the petitioners in the Lecturer (Selection Grade) was delayed and they were placed in the Selection Grade by the Management only on 29.05.2023. 13. In the meanwhile, the UGC 6 th Pay Revision Order came into force as per GO dated 27.03.2010. By Ext.P6 GO dated 10.12.2010, the Government made it clear that the Lecturers who became eligible for placement in Selection Grade prior to 17.09.2010 can claim the benefits of 5 th Pay Revision. The petitioners had become eligible for placement in Selection Grade prior to 17.09.2010. However, when necessary proposals were forwarded for approval, the University instead of approving the placement of the petitioners in the Selection Grade, rejected the proposal holding that they are now governed by the 6 th Pay Revision Order and subsequent 7 th Pay Revision Order. 14. The rejection is obviously unsustainable because as ordered by the Government in Ext.P6 GO, the petitioners became eligible for placement in Lecturer (Selection Grade) prior to 17.09.2010. Perhaps, understanding the said eligibility of the petitioners, the respondents have taken a stand that the proposal for placement submitted by the petitioners can be considered by the University on submitting revised fixation statement and other required documents. Perhaps, understanding the said eligibility of the petitioners, the respondents have taken a stand that the proposal for placement submitted by the petitioners can be considered by the University on submitting revised fixation statement and other required documents. Respondents 1 and 2 have also taken a stand that since the petitioners submitted the proposal only 13.06.2023, the placement given to such Lecturers shall be cancelled. 15. The said stand of respondents 1 and 2 cannot be accepted in the light of the facts of the case. The petitioners became eligible for placement in Lecturer (Selection Grade) during the years 2007-2010. They were not granted the benefits due to the pendency of certain litigations. W.P.(C) No.32981/2014 was disposed of by this Court only on 29.06.2022. The proposal was thereafter submitted on 13.06.2023. Therefore, there is no considerable delay in submission of the proposals. 16. It is also an admitted fact that similarly situated Lecturers, namely Murukan R. and Joseph Deril K.S., have been granted the benefit of Lecturer (Selection Grade) as per Exts.P8 and P9. The petitioners are similarly situated and the petitioners cannot be denied the benefit of the 5 th UGC Pay Revision which had accrued on them. In the circumstances of the case, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 and 2 to extend to the petitioners the benefit of Ext.P6 GO dated 10.12.2010 and place the petitioners in the Lecturer (Selection Grade) with effect from the dates mentioned in Exts.P3, P4 and P5 with all consequential benefits. This shall be done within a period of two months.