Union Of India & Ors. vs Mahabir Singh Gosain & Ors.
2010 Latest Caselaw 179 Del

*                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+                                W.P. (C.) No.1688/2008

%                             Date of Decision: 14.01.2010

Union of India & Ors.                                             .... Petitioners
                              Through Sh. R.V. Sinha, Advocate.

                                       Versus

Mahabir Singh Gosain & Ors.                                   .... Respondent
           Through          Nemo.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MOOL CHAND GARG

1.     Whether reporters of Local papers may be                      YES
       allowed to see the judgment?
2.     To be referred to the reporter or not?                        NO
3.     Whether the judgment should be reported in                    NO
       the Digest?


ANIL KUMAR, J.

*

The petitioners, Union of India, Director General, Military training

& others have challenged the order dated 8th November, 2007 in OA No.

140/2007 titled Mahabir Singh Gosain and Others vs. Union of India

directing petitioners to give pay scale of Rs.8000-Rs.13,500 to the

respondents with all consequential benefits in view of the order passed

in OA No. 537/1989 and petitioner‟s letter dated 11th August, 1997.

The respondents are the demonstrators in the colleges and

institution of Defense and they had sought grant of assured career

progression at par with their counterparts in University Grants

Commission. They had challenged the order dated 13th July, 2006

which was passed by the petitioners pursuant to order passed in OA

No. 453/2005.

The respondents had sought pay scale of Rs. 1740-3000

contending inter alia that they are performing identical functions as

performed by the demonstrators in Jawahar Lal Nehru University and

other colleges run by Government of India. It was asserted by the

respondents that the method of recruitment and minimum qualification

prescribed for the post was same and rather the demonstrators of Army

Cadet Colleges were also required to possess experience in addition to

their possessing a decree in science.

The plea of the respondents in OA no. 537/1989 for grant of pay

scale of UGC, was allowed by Allahabad Bench of the Administrative

Tribunal and the petitioners were directed to grant scale of pay of

Rs.1440-3000 to the respondents recommended by the University

Grants Commission from the date benefit of UGC scales of pay had

been extended to other members of the teaching staff of the Army Cadet

College.

The order passed in OA no. 537/1989 was not set aside or

modified. The respondents thereafter claimed arrears of personal pay

scale of Rs. 2200-4000 and filed yet another original application bearing

OA no. 843/1998 which was decided on 29th July, 2003. The

petitioners in the said OA had admitted that the respondents were paid

UGC scale of Rs.500-900 w.e.f 1st June, 1983 and it was also admitted

that any benefit accrued there from would also be applicable to

respondents on the basis of grants of such benefits under the UGC

scale. The petitioners were therefore directed to pass appropriate

orders within four months from 29th July, 2003.

The order passed by the Administrative Tribunal dated 29th July,

2003 is as under:-

"6. Since, respondents have now admitted that applicants were paid the U.G.C. scale of Rs. 500-900 w.e.f 01.1.1983, it goes without saying that any benefit which accrued therefrom in accordance with law would be available to the applicants on the basis of such grant of U.G.C. scale. The necessary orders, if not passed by the respondents to this effect, shall be passed by them within the same period of 4 months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction the O.A. is disposed of with no order as to costs."

The petitioners thereafter, however, denied extension of ACP

Scheme to the respondent as per the pay scale under UGC despite the

order passed in OA No. 453/2005. It was decided on 10th April, 2006

holding that whatever was contained in the recommendation of UGC on

8th October, 1992 without modification, mutatis mutandis has been

extended to the teaching staff of Defense. The petitioners, therefore,

were directed to re-examine the claim of the respondents strictly in

accordance with their own letter issued in 1997 and having due regard

to their own observation for granting UGC scale of Rs.2200-4000.

The petitioners, however, rejected the claim on the ground that

the recruitment rules of demonstrators in UGC are different with that of

the petitioners and only the pay scales were granted to the respondents

on the directions of the Tribunal and therefore the respondents are not

entitled for claim of pay scales of assured career progression scheme.

Aggrieved by the order of the petitioners turning down their request for

grant of assured career promotion scheme, OA No. 140/2007 was filed,

which was allowed by order dated 8th November, 2007 which is

impugned by the petitioners in the present petition.

This has not been disputed by the petitioners that the order

passed in OA No. 537/1989 granting the pay scale of UGC was not

challenged by the petitioners. In the circumstance, the petitioners

cannot be allowed to contend that UGC pay scales were granted on the

directions by the tribunal and therefore despite granting the UGC pay

scale, for grant of pay scales under Assured Career Progression

Scheme, the scale granted by the UGC cannot be applied to the

respondents. The UGC scales were granted to the respondents after

considering the functions of the respondents vis-à-vis functions of

demonstrators in the institutions under UGC, their method of

recruitment, minimum qualification and the fact that the respondents/

demonstrators of Army Cadet College were required to possess

experience in addition to their possessing a degree in science.

The tribunal has noted that the letter dated 11th August, 1997 by

the Government to the Chief of Army staff. The letter stipulates that

career progression in the case of lecturers will be adopted in the

institutions of NDA and IMA, however, same would be subject to such

conditions as were applicable to UGC contained in its scheme. The

learned counsel for the petitioners is unable to explain that if the pay

scales under career progression of UGC is applicable to the lecturers

than why pay scales under career progression will not be applicable to

the demonstrators of defense institutions especially since pay scales

had already been granted pursuant to the orders of the Tribunal which

were not challenged. The Learned counsel for the petitioners is also

unable to give any cogent reason for not applying the pay scales under

career progression to the demonstrators in contradistinction to the

lecturers. Why pay scales under career progression of UGC scheme is

applicable to the lecturers of defense colleges and not to the

demonstrators of defense colleges has not been explained nor there are

any grounds to distinguish the two in the facts and circumstances.

In these circumstances on the ground that UGC scales were

granted to the respondents pursuant to the orders of the Tribunal and

now the respondents are not entitled for Assured Career Progression as

applicable to UGC, cannot be sustained.

Considering all the facts and circumstances there is no such

illegality or irregularity in the order of the Tribunal which will require

interference by this Court. There is no error in the order dated 8th

November, 2007 in OA No. 140/07. The writ petition in the facts and

circumstances is without any merit and it is, therefore, dismissed.

ANIL KUMAR, J.

JANUARY 14, 2010                                MOOL CHAND GARG, J.
„ss‟