Uttarakhand High Court
WPSB/167/2022 on 11 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
AT NAINITAL
SRI JUSTICE S.K. MISHRA, A.C.J.
AND
SRI JUSTICE R.C. KHULBE, J.
11TH MAY, 2022
WRIT PETITION (S/B) No. 167 OF 2022
Between:
Dr. Tejvir Singh Tomar and others.
...Petitioners
and
State of Uttarakhand and others.
...Respondents
Counsel for the petitioners. : Mr. Abhijay Negi, the learned counsel.
Counsel for the respondent nos. 1 : Mr. Pradeep Joshi, the learned
and 2. Additional Chief Standing Counsel for
the State of Uttarakhand.
Counsel for the respondent no. 3. : Mr. Vikas Pande, the learned counsel.
Upon hearing the learned Counsel, the Court made
the following
JUDGMENT : (per Sri S.K. Mishra, A.C.J.)
In this Writ Petition, the petitioners have
prayed for the following reliefs :-
"a) Issue a writ, order or directions in the nature of
certiorari to quash the letter dated 19.01.2022 as
authored by Director Higher Education, by which he
has mandated that the promotion avenue be
considered only from the UGC Regulations of 2018
and not from UGC Regulations of 2010.
b) Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of
mandamus commanding the respondent no. 2 to act
on the judgment and order dated 14.06.2018.
c) Pass any suitable order or direction of any
nature which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and
proper in the present circumstance of the case.
d) Award the cost of the Writ Petition."
2. It is submitted by Mr. Abhijay Negi, the
learned counsel for the petitioner, that the central issue
involved in this case is already covered by the judgment
passed by this Court in the case of Dr. Deepak Kumar
Tiwari v. State of Uttarakhand and others (Writ
Petition (S/B) No. 622 of 2021) dated 27.04.2022.
3. In the aforesaid judgment, after taking into
consideration various provisions, the Court has come to
the following conclusion :-
"9. The submissions made by the learned Additional
Chief Standing Counsel for the State of Uttarakhand
are unacceptable in view of the fact that the UGC
Regulations of the year 2018 were placed before the
Evaluation Committee and it recommended the same
in the year 2019, which was adopted by the State of
Uttarakhand in the year 2019. In the interregnum,
there was no advertisement for Career Advancement
Scheme for any of the Assistant Professor or Associate
Professor. So, in effect, the petitioner was denied any
opportunity of availing this three years' window period
for no fault of his. It is not the case of the State of
Uttarakhand that, in the meantime, there was no
vacancy in the post of Professors.
10. That being the position, we are of the opinion
that the interest of justice would be sub-served if the
petitioner is considered for Career Advancement
Scheme as per his option either under the 2010 or the
2018 UGC Regulations.
11. In that view of the mater, we find enough merit
in this Writ Petition. The Writ Petition is, hereby,
allowed. The respondent no. 2, namely Director,
Higher Education, is directed to permit the petitioner
to move his application as per the eligibility criteria of
the 2010 or the 2018 UGC Regulations, as per his
option."
4. It is not disputed by Mr. Pradeep Joshi, the
learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the State
of Uttarakhand, that the question involved in this case is
covered by the judgment passed by this Court as
referred to above.
5. On the last occasion, the learned Additional
Chief Standing Counsel for the State was directed to
take instructions regarding the stage of interview. The
learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel submits that
the process is on, and the petitioners may be allowed to
exercise their option in the light of the judgment passed
by this Court, as mentioned above.
6. In that view of the matter, the Writ Petition is,
hereby, allowed. The respondent no. 2, namely
Director, Higher Education, is directed to permit the
petitioners to move their applications as per the
eligibility criteria of the 2010 or the 2018 UGC
Regulations, as per their option.
7. In sequel thereto, all pending applications
stand disposed of.
8. Urgent copy of this order be supplied to the
learned counsel for the parties, as per Rules.
________________
S.K. MISHRA, A.C.J.
_____________
R.C. KHULBE, J.
Dt: 11th May, 2022
Rahul
