Gujarat High Court
Ushma Ramaniklal Panchal vs State Of Gujarat on 15 September, 2025
Author: Nikhil S. Kariel
Bench: Nikhil S. Kariel
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1900/2023 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1900 of 2023
With
CIVIL APPLICATION (FOR STAY) NO. 1 of 2023
In R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1900 of 2023
==========================================================
USHMA RAMANIKLAL PANCHAL
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
ULLASH N GOHIL(8357) for the Petitioner(s) No. 1
MR ADITYA PATHAK ASSTT. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for the
Respondent(s) No. 1
MR. ALKESH N SHAH(3749) for the Respondent(s) No. 4
NOTICE SERVED BY DS for the Respondent(s) No. 2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIKHIL S. KARIEL
Date : 15/09/2025
ORAL ORDER
1. Heard learned advocate Mr. Ullash N. Gohil for the petitioner and
learned AGP Mr. Aditya Pathak for the respondent No.1 - State.
2. Learned advocate Mr. Gohil would rely upon an order dated
02.02.2022 passed by a learned Coordinate Bench in Special Civil
Application No.12012 of 2019 confirmed by Division Bench of this Court
vide decision dated 15.02.2023 in Letters Patent Appeal No.97 of 2023. It is
submitted by learned advocate Mr. Gohil that the issue involved is that
academic grade pay of Rs.9000 granted to the petitioner, having been
withdrawn by the respondent authorities. It is submitted by learned
advocate that the issue involved in the petition, which had been decided by
the learned Coordinate Bench, was the same except that the petitioner was a
Lecturer in Mathematics, whereas the petitioner is a Lecturer in the subject
of Costume and Design. Learned advocate would submit that since both the
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1900/2023 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2025
undefined
Lecturers were parts of the humanities group, therefore, the judgment
would apply to the case on hand completely.
3. Learned AGP Mr. Pathak while he could not dispute the proportion,
could also not tender any decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, whereby
the decision dated 15.02.2023 in Letters Patent Appeal No.97 of 2023 had
been interfered with.
5. Considering such a position, paras 2, 2.1, 3, 4, 5, 5.1, 6, 6.1, 6.2 and 7
are reproduced herein below for benefit:
"2. By filling this Letters Patent Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent,
the State has sought to challenge judgment and order dated 02.02.2022 read
with order dated 16.02.2022, which was upon Note for Speaking-to-
Minutes, of learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application, whereby the
respondents petitioner was granted relief by setting aside the communication
dated 1.7.2019. The respondents were directed to refund the amount which
may have been recovered from the petitioner pursuant to the said
communication. Learned single Judge directed to restore the benefits of
Academic Grade Pay (AGP) of Rs.9000/- from 17.09.2011 to the
petitioner and also to pay the arrears within stipulated time.
2.1 By the aforementioned communication dated 1.7.2019, the respondent
authorities withdrew the Academic Grade Pay (ACP) of Rs. 9000 granted
to the petitioner with effect from September, 2011. The prayer in the Special
Civil Application was to set aside the said communication. The benefit of
AGP extended to the petitioner with effect from 17.9.2011 came to be
withdrawn by the said communication dated 1.7.2019 issued by respondent
No.3. The petitioner also prayed to set aside the order of recovery from
petitioner's salary, which was also contemplated in the said communication
cum decision dated 1.7.2019.
3. The appellant was appointed as Class-II Lecturer in Mathematics. He had
qualification in M.Sc. (Mathematics) at the time of his appointment in the
government engineering college. The pay scale given to the petitioner was Rs.
2200-4000 on ad ahoc basis as per notification dated 11.8.1997. The
petitioner joined duties on 17.9.1997 upon issuance of order of appointment
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1900/2023 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2025
undefined
in his favour. Having been so selected and appointed through Gujarat Public
Service Commission, the petitioner stood confirmed in service upon completion
of two years of probation period, with effect from 27.7.2021.
4. Before considering any other aspect of merit in the controversy, it could be
immediately noticed that the grant of AGP of Rs. 9000/- to the petitioner
was upon completion of three years of service and was granted on 2.8.2011 in
view of resolution of the Education Department. The said benefit came to be
withdrawn after passage of long years as per impugned communication dated
1.7.2019. This time gap without any plausible explanation, by itself becomes
factor vitiating in law the decision to withdraw the benefit.
5. As noted above, it was resolution dated 2.8.2011 by which the petitioner
was granted the benefit of AGP. Condition no. 12 of the said resolution was
as under:
"(12) Lecturer (Selection Grade), completing 3 years of teaching with the
AGP of Rs.8000 shall be eligible, subject to other conditions, as may be
prescribed by AICTE, to move to the Pay Band of Rs. 37400-67000
with AGP of Rs.9000."
5.1 The stand of the appellant state was that the petitioner was not holding the
Ph.D. decree and therefore was not eligible as head of the department and
that the AGP of Rs. 9000 was therefore wrongly given to the petitioner.
5.2 In this regard, clause No. 3.8 of the aforesaid resolution which was also
relied on by learned single Judge becomes relevant to notice,
"Lecturers completing three years of teaching in the grade of RS.7000
(stage 3) shall be eligible, subject to the qualifying conditions and the AP
based PBAS requirements prescribed by these Regulations to move to the
Pay Band of Rs.37400-67000 with next higher grade of Rs.8000 (stage
4) and to he designated as Lecturer (Selection Grade). However, those
joining the service after 5th March, 2010 shall have also earned Ph.D in
addition to above mentioned requirements to move in
the Stage 4."
5.3 It is also evident that the aforesaid condition prescribing the 3 years of service
in the resolution was adopted by the State Government from the All India
Council for Technical Education [Pay Scales, Service conditions and
Qualifications for the Teachers and other Academic Staff in Technical
Institutions (Diploma) Regulations, 2010]. The conditions of the same,
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1900/2023 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2025
undefined
particularly Condition No. (x) reads as under
"(x) Incumbent Lecturers (Selection Grade) who have completed 3
years in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs. 1200- 8300 on 1.1.2006
shall be placed in Pay Band of Rs. 37400-67000 with AGP Pay of
Rs. 9000 and shall be continued to be designated as Lecturers
(Selection Grade)."
5.4 The learned Single Judge then proceeded to analyse the merits in light of the
aforesaid clear provisions as under;
"(iv) This clause also is in line with the notification of the AICTE dated
05.03.2012 of the Government Resolution dated 02.08.2011. However,
what needs to be pointed out while reproducing the clause 3.8 which is
reproduced hereinabove is that after setting out a minimum yardstick of
three years for the purposes of being eligible to be granted the AGP of
Rs.9,000/-, the clause further stipulates that those joining the services
after 05.03.2020 shall have also earned EHD in addition to above
mentioned requirements to move to stage 4. It is in light of this clause that
the stand of the Government needs to be rejected outright.
(v) It is also to be noted that even the AICTE in its communication dated
15.10.2020 which is placed on record has opined that the cases of faculty
members who had joined services before 05.03.2010 and are otherwise
eligible to move to AGP of Rs.9,000/- (stage 4) will continue to be
processed as per the provisions mentioned in para 3.8 of the AICTE
Gazette Notification dated 04.01.2016. The communication, therefore,
stated that "It may thus be concluded that Ph.D requirement forpraying
AGP of Rs.9,000/- is essentially only for those faculty members who
have joined after 05.03.2010.""
5.5 Accordingly, the learned Single Judge concluded that in light of the
notification dated 08.11.2012 mentioned above and having regard to the
exceptions set out in last paragraph of Clause 3.8, the requirement of
holding Ph.D degree could not have been insisted upon except in the case of
the appointees who were appointed after 05.03.2010.
5.6 The same is reflected as under;
"6.1 Reading the notification dated 08.11.2012, particularly in light
of the exception set out in the last para of Clause 3.8, the requisite of
holding of Ph.D degree could only be insisted upon if an appointee was
post 05.03.2010. Evident it is from the facts narrated hereinabove and
which cannot even be disputed by other side is that the appointment of
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1900/2023 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2025
undefined
the petitioner was prior to 05.03.2010. that is evident even from the
extension of benefits of the AGP of Rs.9,000/- which was granted to
the petitioner following the notification of 05.03.2010.
6.2 Clearly therefore, the action of the respondents in recovering the
amount of AGP of Rs.9,000/- and reducing the same and
withdrawing it is not in accordance with the position of law enunciated
hereinabove."
6. This Court is in complete agreement with the reasons recorded by the
learned Single Judge.
7. For the said reasons and the further reasons supplied hereinabove the
present Letters Patent Appeal stands meritless and is summarily
dismissed."
6. Considering the law laid down by learned Coordinate Bench in the
decision quoted herein above and since it appears that the case of the
petitioner herein is identical to the case of the petitioner before the learned
Coordinate Bench, the following directions are passed:
(a) The communication dated 02.07.2020 withdrawing AGP
granted to the petitioner is hereby quashed and set aside.
(b) The petitioner is declared entitled for grant of AGP @
Rs.9000/- w.e.f. December, 2010 and whereas the same shall
not be withdrawn by the respondents. The respondents are
directed to refund the amount that has been recovered from
the petitioner pursuant to the impugned order dated
02.07.2020 and whereas the respondents are further directed to
restore the AGP of the petitioner @ Rs.9000/- from
27.12.2010 and whereas arrears thereof shall be paid to the
petitioner within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt
of this order.
NEUTRAL CITATION
C/SCA/1900/2023 ORDER DATED: 15/09/2025
undefined
7. With the above direction, the present petition stands disposed of as
allowed. Direct Service is permitted.
Consequently, Civil Application stands disposed of.
(NIKHIL S. KARIEL,J)
Y.N. VYAS
