A single-judge bench of the Madras High Court comprising of Justice B. Pugalendhi was hearing a petition against the impugned order of the District Library Officer who directed the recovery of increments of the petitioner holding that he had not obtained the degree in 10+2+3 format. It was contended that the increments were received by fraud. Thus, the HC held that such incentives cannot be allowed to stand if it has been obtained by fraud.
Brief Facts:
The petitioner was working as a Grade I Librarian. At the time of appointment, he was having the qualification of Higher Secondary Education. Subsequently the petitioner obtained M.A. degree, BLIS and MLIS degrees. Accordingly, the petitioner was provided with incentive increments for acquiring higher qualifications. However, the second respondent/District Library Officer, by the impugned order in Na.Ka.No.268/A/2020 dated 03.02.2020, had directed for recovering the increments holding that the petitioner has not obtained the degree in 10+2+3 format. Challenging the same, the present writ petition was filed.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The petitioner had obtained the additional qualifications (degrees) only after getting prior permission from the Department and the degrees were obtained only from Government recognized Universities. Only after due verification by the Department, the petitioner was granted incentive increments. There was no misrepresentation on her part. While so, without granting any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the impugned order of recovery came to be passed.
Contentions of the Respondents:
As per the Government Order in G.O(Ms). No.107, Personnel and Administrative Department, dated 18.08.2009, the earlier Government Orders recognizing Open University Degrees are canceled and candidates, who have studied SSLC (X-Standard) and Higher Secondary Course (+2) and thereafter, studied the degree course alone should be considered as persons eligible for entering into Government service. That apart, as per the Government Order in G.O(Ms). No. 116, Personnel and Administrative Reforms Department, dated 18.08.2010, those who possess a Post Graduate degree through Open University System without obtaining a basic degree cannot be considered as possessing a Post Graduate Degree for appointment to Public Service. The petitioner obtained an MLIS degree without possessing the basic degree. Therefore, the incentive increment, which was provided to him erroneously, was being sought to be recovered.
Observations of the Court:
Relying on the observations given in the judgment in N. Ramesh vs Sibi Madan Gabriel and others (2008) 3 MLJ 255, the court held that the conferment of a Master's Degree on students who do not have the "first degree" is clearly contrary to the Regulations of the UGC.
The court further expounded that the very basis for the grant of incentive increments is to encourage the Teachers to acquire additional qualifications, which would be useful for the students and for the improvement of the education system. The Government, by issuing various government orders, thus provides incentive increments to the Teachers, based on the additional qualifications acquired by them, viz., B.Lit., B.A., M.A., M.Ed., etc. Moreover, the court acknowledged that some of the Teachers were provided up to three incentive increments, but, later the maximum number of incentive increments has been restricted as two in their total service period. Going to the merits, the bench held that an incentive is a concession granted by the Government to the Teachers to motivate them and such concession can never be claimed as an absolute right and it is to be granted strictly in accordance with the terms and conditions stipulated in the policy. Wrong sanctioning of incentive increment to any Teacher cannot be treated as precedent, nor it can be sustained.
Applying it in the present case, the court held that the petitioner had not obtained the Master’s degree by following the regular stream of 10+2+3 format and since the master’s degree obtained without the basic qualification of Bachelor’s Degree cannot be considered as a valid degree, the court was of the view that the petitioner was not entitled for any incentive increment for the same. Further, the court reiterated the judgment of Bank of India v. Avinash D. Mandivikar [2005 (7) SCC 640], wherein the Supreme Court held that no judgment of a court, no order of a minister, can be allowed to stand if it has been obtained by fraud - fraud unravels everything.
Decision of the Court:
The court issued certain directions with respect to the recovery of incentives from the petitioner and disposed of the petition.
Case Title: K. Mala vs The Director, Directorate of Public Libraries and anr.
Coram: Justice B. Pugalendhi
Case No.: WP(MD)No.3373 of 2020 and WMP(MD)Nos.2837, 9150 of 2020
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. P. Arun Jayatram
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. J. Ashok
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source : https://www.freeimageslive.co.uk/files/images008/graduation.preview.jpg
