NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY VS OM PRAKASH RAHI Case

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF  TECHNOLOGY VS OM PRAKASH RAHI Case

Landmark Cases of India / सुप्रीम कोर्ट के ऐतिहासिक फैसले

NON­REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

  CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).       2575        OF 2022

(Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 31892 of 2018)

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF 

TECHNOLOGY & ANOTHER ….APPELLANT(S)

VERSUS

OM PRAKASH RAHI & OTHERS ….RESPONDENT(S)

WITH

   CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).      2576         OF 2022

     (Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 31890 of 2018)

   CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).       2577         OF 2022

     (Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 32025 of 2018)

   CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).       2578          OF 2022

     (Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 31445 of 2018)

   CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).       2579         OF 2022

     (Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 31900 of 2018)

J U D G M E N T

Rastogi, J.

1. Leave granted.

1

2. The present batch of appeals are directed against the selfsame judgment dated 31st July, 2018 passed by the Division Bench

of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla which upheld the

order passed by the Director of the National Institute of Technology

without going through the process of selection of the teachers in the

higher pay band of Rs. 37400­67000 with AGP Rs.9000 and redesignated as Associate Professor consequent upon completion of

three years of service in AGP Rs.8000(6th Central Pay Commission)

and   directed   the   appellants   to   consider   their   claim   for   further

promotion   to   the   post   of   Professor,   and   if   found   suitable,   the

teacher may be promoted from the due date with all consequential

benefits.

3. The facts in brief have been taken note from Civil Appeal @

SLP(Civil)   No.   31892   of   2018,   culled   out   from   the   record   and

relevant   for   the   purpose   are   that   the   appellant­institution,   was

initially the Regional  Engineering College(REC) (H.P.), Hamirpur.

Consequent upon conversion of 14 NITs and 3 RECs including the

present institution at Hamirpur as National Institute of Technology

with deemed university status, they were taken over as fully funded

2

institutions of Central Government by notification dated 14th May,

2003 wherein it was decided with the approval of the competent

authority to implement Career Advancement Scheme(CAS) in NITs

after approval of the recommendations of the Selection Committee

by the Board of Governors(BOGs) of the NIT concerned by Office

Memorandum dated 15th  September, 2003 and prescribed service

conditions   of   the   teachers/employees   of   the   then   RECs   upon

conversion   as   NITs   with   deemed   university   status   by   later

notification dated 9th November, 2003.

4. Later, Parliament enacted the National Institute of Technology

Act, 2007 w.e.f. 6th  June, 2007 wherein the appellant institution

finds place in the first Schedule appended to the Act at Serial No. 5

in the list of central institutions incorporated and correspondingly

became the NIT, Hamirpur and later by the NIT (Amendment) Act,

2012 vide notification dated 8th June 2012, it became the National

Institute   of   Technology(Science,   Education   and   Research)   Act,

2007(hereinafter being referred to as the “Act 2007”). 

5. The respondent­teachers were initially appointed as a Lecturer

in   their   respective   Engineering   Department   in   the   then   REC,

3

Hamirpur(now NIT Hamirpur) on 28th  June 2000.   Later, on the

recommendations   of   the   staff   selection   committee,   respondent

teachers were designated as Lecturers(Sr. Scale) in the pay scale of

Rs.10000­15200 with the approval of Board of Governors w.e.f. 25th

July,   2005   vide   order   dated   30th  December,   2005   and   later

pursuant   to   the   recommendations   of   the   6th  Central   Pay

Commission notified by letter dated 18th August, 2009, respondent

teachers were placed as Assistant Professors in AGP Rs.6000 w.e.f.

1

st  January, 2006 and granted AGP Rs.7000 w.e.f. 1st  July, 2006

vide pay fixation order dated 20th January 2010.  Further, on the

recommendations of the selection committee in terms of directives

of   Ministry   of   Human   Resource   Development   (hereinafter   being

referred to as the “MHRD”) dated 14th March, 2012 and 18th March

2013   and   with   due   approval   of   the   Board   of   Governors,   NIT,

Hamirpur, they were fixed in the AGP Rs.8000 vide orders dated

25th June, 2013 and 12th November, 2013 respectively.  The orders

passed by the competent authority granting AGP of Rs.8000 are not

the subject matter of challenge.

4

6. It may be noticed that earlier, such of the Assistant Professors

and Lecturers (Selection Grade) who had completed the requisite

period of service in the appropriate pay scale with the approval of

the competent authority, were re­designated as Associate Professor

in   the   pay   scale/pay   band   PB­4   (Rs.37400­67000)   with   AGP

Rs.9000   by   an   order   dated   22nd  June   2010   as   per   the   MHRD

guidelines dated 18th August, 2009 and letter dated 31st December,

2008. 

7. But this time, the Director of the NIT, on its own, on mere

completion of three years in the AGP Rs.8000, without undergoing

the process of selection or the recommendations being made with

the approval of the Board of Governors, granted benefit of AGP

Rs.9000 with re­designation as Associate Professor to all the six

respondent   teachers   and   one   of   the   orders   for   the   purpose   of

reference is reproduced hereunder:­

“NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

HAMIRPUR(H.P.)­177005

Office Order

Consequent upon the completion of 03 years of service in AGP

8000(6th CPC) by Dr. O.P. Rahi on 24/07/2013, he is hereby placed

in the higher pay band of Rs. 37400­67000 with AGP 9000 and

5

designated as Associate Professor w.e.f. 25/07/2013 in term with

para 2 (a)(x) of Govt. of India, Ministry of HRD, New Delhi letter No.

1­32/2006­U.I(i) dated 31st December 2008.

The above incumbent will be entitled to draw the basic pay of

12400+AGP 9000 w.e.f. 19/10/2013 subject to verification by audit

and   subsequent   direction,   if   any,   received   from   MHRD   in   this

regard.

By Order

DIRECTOR

NIT HAMIRPUR(HP)

Dt 27/10/14

NIT/HMR/Admn/Rev­270(Vol­18)/2014/6435­47

Copy to:

1.Above named officer through HOD, MED

2.Dy. Registrar(Accounts), NIT Hamirpur(HP)

3.PF of the individual

REGISTRAR

       NIT HAMIRPUR(HP)”

8. Since it was not approved by MHRD as it was held to be in

contravention to the guidelines dated 14th  March, 2012 and 18th

March 2013, that became the cause of grievance to approach the

High Court by filing the writ petitions under Article 226 of the

Constitution.  

9. The   High   Court,   under   the   impugned   judgment,   held   that

MHRD was not the authority competent to issue guidelines after the

Act, 2007 came into force and since the statute, for the first time,

6

was incorporated/enacted in 2017, laying down the recruitment

rules  relating  to   the   promotion   of   teachers   in  NIT   having  been

incorporated by an amendment to the statute by clause 23(5)(a) on

21st July, 2017 whereby schedule ‘E’ has been appended providing

qualifications and other terms and conditions for academic staff of

NITs which may be applicable prospectively and accordingly upheld

their placement in the higher pay band of Rs. 37400­67000 with

AGP Rs.9000 and their re­designation as Associate Professor with a

further direction for their consideration to the post of Professor in

accordance with the guidelines which have now been enforced in

the year 2017.

10. Learned   counsel   for   the   appellants   submits   that   MHRD

guidelines dated 31st December, 2008 on which the High Court has

heavily relied upon are not applicable to the NIT.  To the contrary,

after the Act, 2007 came into force, the first statute in exercise of its

power under Section 26(1) of the Act was notified on 23rd  April,

2009 which did not contain any provision for Career Advancement

Scheme and it has been introduced by the MHRD to deal with the

genuine stagnation and hardship faced by the teachers and to meet

7

such exigency, higher pay grade or re­designation will be on ‘in­situ’

basis and, therefore, the work allocation remains the same and that

is   the   reason   for   which   each   of   the   respondent   teachers   was

appointed in the AGP Rs.8000 by an order dated 25th June, 2013

and 12th  November, 2013 in terms of the guidelines dated 14th

March,   2012   read   with   18th  March,   2013   based   on   the

recommendations made by the duly constituted committee. In the

given facts and circumstances, the High Court has committed the

manifest error in relying upon the guidelines of MHRD dated 31st

December   2008,   which   is   not   applicable   to   NIT   teachers,   in

consequence, the finding which has been recorded by the High

Court in upholding the orders passed by the Director granting AGP

Rs.9000 merely on completion of three years’ service and their redesignation   as   Associate   Professor   being,   per   se,   illegal   is   not

sustainable in law.

11. Learned counsel further submits that while granting benefit of

AGP Rs.9000 and their re­designation as Associate Professor, the

Director is not the authority competent in terms of the provisions of

the Act 2007, at the same time, AGP Rs.9000 and re­designation as

8

Associate   Professor   was   made   subject   to   verification   and

subsequent direction of MHRD in this regard, hence no right could

be said to be vested in favour of the respondent teachers and that is

the reason, the matter, at one stage, was sent to the committee and

since   the   committee   also   raised   certain   objections,   matter   was

referred to MHRD for seeking clarification and MHRD recorded its

finding that since the appointments have not been made in terms of

the guidelines dated 14th March, 2012 followed by 18th March 2013

and the appointments made by the Director not being approved, no

error was committed in the procedure been followed to withdraw the

benefits extended to the respondent teachers. 

12. Learned   counsel   further   submits   that   this   fact   has   been

completely overlooked by the High Court that the appointments

were made in the AGP Rs.8000, after the recommendations made

by   the   selection   committee   been   approved   by   the   Board   of

Governors,   in   terms   of   the   guidelines   dated   14th  March,   2012

followed   by   18th  March   2013   that   indeed   includes   further

appointments   to   AGP   Rs.9000   and   re­designation   as   Associate

Professor and thus, the finding which has been recorded relying

9

upon the MHRD circular dated 31st December, 2008 in upholding

the   order   of   AGP   Rs.9000   and   re­designation   to   the   post   of

Associate Professor is not sustainable in law.

13. Learned counsel further submits that after the Act, 2007 came

into force, the first statute was notified in exercise of its power

under sub­section (1) of Section 26 of the Act, 2007 with the prior

approval of the visitor of NITs by notification dated 23rd April, 2009.

Clause 23 of the statute 2009 provides for making appointment to

the post of teachers by direct recruitment/promotion pursuant to

the constitution of selection committee.  Although, the notification

and other terms and conditions of appointment could not be laid

down by that time and it was notified in the year 2017, thus, in the

given circumstances, by virtue of Section 5(d) of the Act 2007,

laying   down   the   conditions   of   eligibility   for   appointment,   the

guidelines issued by the  MHRD   have a binding force and  the

finding recorded by the High Court holding that MHRD is not an

authority competent to issue guidelines after the Act, 2007 came

into   force,   is   not   sustainable   particularly,   in   the   given

circumstances   when   the   respondent   teachers   got   AGP   Rs.8000

10

pursuant to the very guidelines of MHRD dated 14th March, 2012

followed with 18th March, 2013.

14. Thus, the respondent teachers, at least could not be permitted

to approbate and reprobate, at the same time, while availing the

AGP Rs.8000 under the MHRD guidelines dated 14th March, 2012

followed with 18th March, 2013, it is not open to canvass that the

very guidelines will  not  apply for further AGP Rs.9000 and redesignation as Associate Professor and this has been completely

overlooked by the High Court while passing the impugned judgment

and needs to be interfered with by this Court.

15. Per   contra,   learned   counsel   for   the   respondents,   while

supporting the impugned judgment, submits that once their merit

has been assessed by the committee and each of them has gone

through the process of selection and interview under the Career

Advancement Scheme as per the norms fixed for Centrally Funded

Technical Institutions and corresponding AGP Rs.8000 has been

granted   to   them   by   orders   dated   25th  June,   2013   and   12th

November, 2013 respectively, each of them became entitled for AGP

Rs.9000 and for re­designation to the post of Associate Professor on

11

completion   of   three   years’   service   in   the   grade   of   Assistant

Professors/   Lecturers(Sel.   Grade)   in   terms   of   MHRD   Guidelines

dated 31st  December, 2008 and para 2(x) in particular, and the

Director, being the competent authority at the given point of time,

and each of them had indisputedly completed three years’ in the

AGP Rs.8000 was entitled for the higher pay band of Rs. 37400­

67000   with   AGP   Rs.9000   and   consequent   re­designation   as

Associate Professor and this what the High Court has upheld in the

impugned judgment and the finding being in conformity with the

MHRD   guidelines   dated   31st  December   2008,   needs   no   further

interference by this Court.

16. Learned   counsel   further   submits   that,   for   the   first   time,

through an amendment to the statute under clause 23(5)(a) on 21st

July, 2017, schedule ‘E’ had been appended providing qualifications

and other terms and conditions for academic staff of NITs, thus, all

actions prior thereto are to be governed in terms of the guidelines

issued by the MHRD applicable at the given point of time, they are

entitled to protect their re­designation of Associate Professor which

they are enjoying for sufficient long time and became due for further

12

promotion to the post of Professor under the guidelines which have

been introduced by an amendment to the statute by notification

dated 21st July 2017, at least at this point of time, this Court may

protect not only their service conditions but the appellants may be

directed to further consider their promotion to the post of Professor

in terms of the amended statute dated 21st July 2017.

17. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and with their

assistance perused the material available on record.

18. That prior to the appellant institution became NIT, it was a

REC and at that time, the guidelines for CAS were prescribed by the

All India Council of Technical Education(AICTE).  Consequent upon

conversion into NIT with deemed status and taken over as fully

funded institution under the Central Government vide notification

dated 14th May 2003, specific guidelines were formulated by MHRD

for CAS for faculty members of NITs wherein it was decided with the

approval   of   the   competent   authority   to   implement   Career

Advancement Scheme(CAS) in NITs for which the composition of the

Selection Committee had been revised and after approval of the

recommendations   of   the   Selection   Committee   by   the   Board   of

13

Governors(BOGs)   of   the   NIT   concerned   by   Office   Memorandum

dated 15th September 2003, prescribed the service conditions of the

employees of the then RECs upon conversion as NITs with deemed

university status by later notification dated 9th November 2003.

19. At  this point  of  time, it will be appropriate  to clarify that

MHRD, on the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission,

introduced schemes for revision of pay structure and re­designation

of   teachers   and   equivalent   cadres   in   universities   and   colleges

following   the   revision   of   pay   scales   of   Central   Government

employees vide its directive dated 31st December, 2008 but that is

not applicable to the NITs and for NITs, separate directives were

issued   by   the   MHRD   on   18th  August,   2009   addressed   to   all

Centrally Funded Technical Institutions and also to the IITs and the

scheme provides for revision of pay structure and re­designation of

teachers under 6th  Central Pay Commission to grant accelerated

promotional benefits of the scheme under para (2), which laid down

the conditions of eligibility for revision to AGP Rs.6000 to AGP

Rs.7000; AGP Rs.7000 to AGP Rs.8000 and AGP Rs.8000 to AGP

Rs.9000 and also re­designation as Associate Professor.  The extract

14

of   MHRD   guidelines   dated   18th  August,   2009   relevant   for   the

purpose is reproduced as under:­ 

F. No. F.23—1/ 2008­TS.11

Government of India

Ministry of Human Resource Development

       Department of Higher Education

Technical Section­11

Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi

Dated, the 18th August, 2009

To

The Director

All Centrally Funded Technical Institutions

Subject:   Revision   of   pay   of   teaching   and   other   Staff   in

Centrally Funded Technical Institutions (CFTIs) following the

pay revision of the Central Government employees on the

recommendation   of   the   6th  Central   Pay   Commission   (6th

CPC).

Sir,

I  am  directed   to say  that   the  Government   of   India  have

decided,   after   taking   into   consideration   the   recommendations

made by the Govardhan Mehta Committee, to revise the pay of

teaching and other staff of Centrally Funded Technical Institutions

following the pay revision of the Central Government employees on

the recommendation of 6th CPC.  The revised pay and other service

conditions   as   approved   by   the   Government   of   India   for   the

teaching and other staff in CFTIs are as under:­

1…

2.For Other Centrally Funded Technical Institutions

The   pay   structure   and   designations   for   all   other

Centrally Funded Technical Institutions will generally be  the

same as per the scheme of revision of pay of teachers, etc. in

15

Universities, etc. as notified by the Ministry of HRD vide letter

No.   1­32/2006­U.II/UI(i)   dated   31st  December,   2008   and

clarification   issued  thereon  from  time  to  time.    However,   in

the   case   of   National   Institutes   of   Technology(NITs),   Indian

School   of   Mines   University(ISMU),   Indian   Institutes   of

Information   Technology(IIITs)   and   Schools   of   Planning   &

Architecture(SPAs),   the   following   accelerated   promotional

benefits will be given while maintaining the UGC pay structure

and designations;

(a) Seven   non­compounded   advance   increments   shall   be

admissible   at   the   entry   level   of   recruitment   as   Assistant

Professor to persons possessing the degree of Ph.D awarded in

the relevant discipline.

(b) (i)An Assistant Professor possessing the degree of Ph.D in the

relevant discipline and with regular service of 3 years’ at AGP of

Rs. 6000/p.m. shall be eligible for moving to AGP of Rs. 7000/­

p.m.

(ii) An Assistant Professor possessing the degree of Ph.D in the

relevant discipline and with regular service of 3 years’ at AGP of

Rs.  7000/­  p.m.  shall be  eligible  for  moving  to  AGP  of  Rs.

8000/­ p.m.

(iii) An Assistant Professor possessing the degree of Ph.D in

the relevant discipline and with regular service of 3 years’

at  AGP  of  Rs.  8000/­  p.m.  shall  be  eligible  for  moving  to

AGP   of   Rs.9000/­   p.m.   and   re­designated   as   Associate

Professor.

(c) Associate Professor completing 4 years’ of regular service in the

AGP of Rs. 9000/­ and possessing a Ph.D degree in the relevant

discipline shall be eligible to be appointed and designated as

Professor, subject to other conditions of academic performance

as laid down by the UGC and by the university, if any.   No

teacher   other   than   those   with   a   Ph.D   shall   be   promoted,

appointed or designated as Professor.   The Pay Band for the

post   of   Professors   shall   be   Rs.   37400­67000   with   AGP   of

Rs.10000/­ p.m.

(d)Up to a maximum of 20% of the sanctioned post of Porfessors

shall be placed in PB­4 in the AGP of Rs.12000/­ p.m. after

16

regular   service   of   6   years’   as   Professor   in   the   AGP   of   Rs.

10000/­ and the minimum pay in the Pay Band will be fixed at

Rs. 48000/­ p.m.   Other eligibility conditions will be as laid

down by the UGC.

(e) All promotions will be based on performance evaluation and

subject to fulfilment of other conditions laid down by MHRD

letter No. 1­32/2006­U.II/U.I(i) dated 31st December, 2008.

….”

20. To overcome the difficulties being faced on implementation of

the   revision   of   pay   structure   of   teachers   in   Centrally   Funded

Technical Institutions dated 18th August 2009, necessary guidelines

were  issued  by   the  MHRD  dated   14th  March,   2012  in   which   a

clarification was made that the guidelines provided by AICTE and

UGC are not applicable to NITs with a further specification that CAS

in NITs will be governed by guidelines and regulations defined by

MHRD and the council for NITs.   The extract of the guidelines

issued by MHRD dated 14th March, 2012 is reproduced below:­

“No. F.33—7/ 2011­TS.III

Government of India

Ministry of Human Resource Development

Department of Higher Education

Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi

Dated, the 14th March, 2012

To

The Directors

17

Of all the National Institutes of Technology(NITs)

Subject: Promotion of faculty members of NITs under the

Career   Advancement   Scheme   (CAS)­   Issue   of   necessary

guidelines thereof­regarding.

Sir/Madam,

I am directed to refer to the various communications issued

by this Ministry on the rules and regulations for promotion under

Career Advancement  Scheme (CAS)  for faculty  members  of the

National Institutes of Technology (NITs).  The Ministry has received

a number of representations from the faculty members of the NITs

on the implementation of CAS.  The issue had also been discussed

in meetings of the Board of Governors (BOGs) of NITs, wherein

concerns have been expressed.

2. In   order   to   resolve   the   issue,   a   Committee   (under   the

Chairmanship of Prof. Sunil Kr. Sarangi, Director, NIT­Rourkela)

was   constituted   for   removal   of   pay   anomalies.     The   report

submitted by this Committee was examined in the Ministry.  It was

felt that instant issue was intricately linked with the Recruitment

Rules for faculty posts.

3. In   order   to   approach   the   instant   issue   from   a   holistic

prospective and in the back­drop of a need for Recruitment Rules,

it was considered necessary to examine these two issues afresh.

Accordingly,   a   Special   Committee   was   set   up   under   the

Chairmanship of Prof. Sarangi, Director, NIT­Rourkela vide this

Ministry’s   Order   F.No.   24­1/2010­TS.III   dated   27.07.2011   and

23.08.2011.  The Sarangi Committee after detailed examination of

the aforesaid issues submitted its report to Standing Committee of

the Council of NITs in its meeting held on 15.11.2011 under the

Chairmanship of Dr. RA Mashelkar.  The Council of NITs in its 3rd

meeting   held   on   18.11.2011   resolved   to   accept   the

recommendations of the Sarangi Committee for implementation of

CAS & Recruitment Rules of faculty in NITs, as modified by the

Standing Committee.

4. Subsequent   to   the   resolution   of   the   NIT   Council,

representations have been received in the Ministry from several

NITs   regarding   the   decisions   taken   for   removal   of   anomalies,

faculty   promotions,   condition   of   service,   etc.     These

representations   have   since   been   examined   in   the   Ministry   in

18

consultation with certain Chairpersons of the BOGs and Directors

of NITs.  After due deliberations, the following general and specific

guidelines are prescribed:

(a) career Advancement Scheme(CAS) is an integral part of a

rigid staff structure where the number of posts at any given level is

limited.   Such a scheme provides an avenue through which a

qualified employee climbs to the higher rung of the career ladder,

even if there is no vacancy.  It, however, will not be treated as mere

formality as the purpose of the scheme was for development of

merit and not eligibility based promotions.

(b) For a faculty member to gain advancement under CAS, he or

she must satisfy the approved criteria under three broad heads: (i)

a critical number of years in the lower level or designation and/or

AGP,   (ii)   cumulative   academic   performance   during   the   service

period   at   the   current   level   in   terms   of   teaching   and   research

output   as   well   as   sharing   institutional   responsibility,   and   (iii)

proficiency and knowledge in one’s chosen field of research and

teaching Superior record in all these three fronts qualifies a faculty

member for advancement to a higher level.

(c ) CAS   has   been   in   operation   in   institutions   under

guidelines   provided   by   AICTE   and   UGC.     It   is   clarified   that

those norms and procedures are not applicable to NITs.   CAS

in NITs will be governed by guidelines and regulations defined

by the Ministry of HRD and the Council of NITs.

(d)..

(e)..

(f) All recommendations of the Selection Committee shall take

effect only from the date of approval of the recommendations by

the Board or any later date as decided by the Board.  There shall

be no retrospective implementation of recommendations in any

case (either financial or notional).

(g) The constitution of the Selection Committee, the procedure

and criteria of selection shall be same for internal and external

candidates.  There shall not be a separate or special interview for

CAS   selection;   interviews   should   be   conducted   along   with

candidates for direct recruitment against vacancies, if any.

19

(h)..

(i)…

(j)…

(k) Any  promotion   or   enhancement   of   Pay   Band   or   Grade

Pay,   already   implemented   by   the   institute   should   be   got

reviewed/examined   by   the   Board   by   a   duly   constituted

selection  committee   immediately.    Any   increment  paid  over

the   beginning   of   the   scale   of   Associate   Professor   to   those

Assistant  Professors  who  did  not  complete  3  years,   is  to  be

recovered from future pay.

(l) The   orders   issued   by   the   Ministry   following   the   6th

Central  Pay  Commission  provides  minimum  number  of  years

of service to go to higher AGP or a higher designation, e.g. 3

years   from   AGP   Rs.   6000/­   to   Rs.   7000/­   or   from   AGP   Rs.

7,000/­ to AGP Rs. 8,000/­ etc.  These are to be implemented

only through the formal selection process.  A formal Selection

Committee (as per the NIT Act, 2007 and the statutes of NITs)

must   examine   the   candidature   and   ensure   that   an

enhancement   is   recommended   on   the   strength   of   academic

contribution expected of a faculty member of an institution of

National Importance.

(m)…

(n) The eligibility criteria(number of years in lower AGP) should

be seen as necessary but not sufficient condition for upgradation

of AGP or change of designation.   Any upgradation can be done

only   on   recommendation   of   a   duly   constituted   Selections

Committee   after   formal   interview.     The   process   for   AGP

upgradation should be as serious and dignified as that for change

of   designation.     A   candidate   must   convince   the   Selection

Committee that he or she engaged in scholastic pursuits (teaching,

research and management) to deserve an upgradation after his/her

last advancement.

(o)…

(p)…

20

(q) All   Institutes   shall   strive   to   conduct   annual   selection

processes regularly in case of Institutes that have not conducted

CAS interviews for 3 years or more.  Selection Committees may, as

a onetime measure, examine scholastic contribution of internal

candidates made after the last interview and recommend a salary

and   AGP   they   would   have   earned   now,   had   the   Selection

Committee met at the appropriate time.

(r )…

(s)….” (emphasis supplied)

21. It will be relevant to note that eligibility has been prescribed

under the relevant directives issued by MHRD dated 18th  August,

2009 followed by 14th  March, 2012 with a clear stipulation that

financial upgradation in terms of 6th Central Pay Commission shall

be extended co­terminus to the teacher, after going through the

formal selection process, in terms of the formation of the selection

committee provided under the Act, 2007 and the statutes of NITs to

examine   the   candidature   and   ensure   overall   suitability   of   the

teacher   on   fulfilment   of   the   relevant   conditions   for   grant   of

upgradation of pay/higher AGP/redesignation, as the case may be.

22. It is not disputed that each of the respondent teachers was

granted financial benefit of the AGP Rs.8000 in terms of MHRD

guidelines dated 14th  March, 2012 followed by 18th  March, 2013

based   on   the   recommendations   of   the   selection   committee

21

constituted   followed   with   interview   and   approval   of   Board   of

Governors to the post of Lecturer(Selection Grade) vide Office order

dated 25th June, 2013 and 12th November, 2013 in the pay scale of

Rs. 12000­18300(corresponding to AGP Rs.8000 in 6th Central Pay

Commission).

23. But while placing in the higher pay band of Rs. 37400­67000

with AGP Rs.9000 and re­designation as Associate Professor, no

procedure   was   followed,   neither   selection   committee   was

constituted nor their suitability was adjudged and also there is no

approval of the Board of Governors which is the requirement of law

under the Act 2007.

24. The Director who is not even the authority competent under

the provisions of the Act, 2007 straightaway, on its own discretion,

without following the procedure prescribed by law, passed orders in

favour of each of the respondent teachers on mere completion of

three years’ service in the AGP Rs.8000 and placed them in the

higher pay band of Rs.37400­67000 with AGP Rs.9000 and redesignation of Associate Professor.  One of the specimens (copy of

the   order   passed   by   the   Director),   has   been   reproduced

22

hereinabove, which in itself, depicts that the Director, who is not

the authority competent under the Act, 2007 passed orders without

due   compliance   of   the   procedure   prescribed   under   the   Office

Memorandum dated 14th March, 2012 and that was the reason for

which   MHRD   declined   to   approve   such   appointments   by   its

communication dated 12th February 2018.

25. The statute was later enacted vide notification dated 23rd April,

2009 in exercise of powers under sub­section (1) of Section 26 of

the Act 2007.  Under Section 13(1)(d), the Board is the appointing

authority for the academic staff in the post of Lecturer or above.  At

the same time, the Central Government, with the prior approval of

the visitor, in exercise of power under sub­section (1) of Section 26

of the Act 2007, framed the first statute for NITs and Director, as an

Officer of the Institute, has been empowered under clause 17 of the

statute to employ teaching supporting staff and discharge all other

administrative functions delegated by the authority.

26. Indisputedly, under the present scheme of the Act 2007, the

first statute came to be introduced by notification dated 23rd April,

2009 followed by later amendments made vide notification dated

23

21st  July, 2017.   The power for appointment of teacher is vested

only   with   the   Board   of   Governors   obviously   on   the

recommendations made by the selection committee.  In the present

scheme of the Act, 2007 of which a reference has been made, the

orders passed by the Director of placing the higher pay band of Rs.

37400­67000 with AGP Rs.9000 and re­designated as Associate

Professor to each of the respondent teachers cannot be said to be in

accordance with the procedure prescribed for CAS in terms of the

guidelines issued by MHRD dated 14th March, 2012 and 18th March,

2013 having not been followed by the Officer of the institution, i.e.

Director, in passing orders which were impugned before the High

Court that indeed cannot be approved by this Court.

27. The Division Bench of the High Court has proceeded on the

premise that after the Act, 2007 has come into force, MHRD is not

competent to issue circulars/guidelines of which a reference has

been made dated 14th March, 2012 and 18th March 2013, which is

completely misplaced for the reason that after the Act, 2007 came

into force, the appellant­institution was taken over by the Central

Government   and   being   fully   funded   institution   by   the   Central

24

Government, the CAS was introduced by MHRD only for accelerated

promotion   and   was   not   in   contradistinction   to   the   scheme   for

appointment available to the teachers under the provisions of the

Act 2007.  At the same time, the respondent teachers were granted

the benefit of AGP Rs.8000 under the same guidelines issued by the

MHRD dated 14th  March, 2012 and 18th  March, 2013 that too on

the   recommendations   of   the   selection   committee   and   with   the

approval of the Board of Governors of NIT, Hamirpur, in the given

facts and circumstances, to hold that the benefits once availed

under the guidelines dated 14th March, 2012 and 18th March, 2013

by the respondent teachers while seeking revision of AGP Rs.8000,

the very scheme will not be applicable while considering for AGP

Rs.9000 and for re­designation as Associate Professor is otherwise

not sustainable in law.

28. The   Division   Bench   has   further   committed   an   error   in

recording a finding that since the statute pursuant to which the

eligibility   conditions   for   appointment   have   been   introduced   by

notification dated 21st  July, 2017 is prospective in character and

earlier   appointments   made   thereto   have   to   be   in   terms   of   the

25

guidelines   issued   by   MHRD   dated   31st  December   2008   for   the

reason   that   the   guidelines   issued   by   the   MHRD   dated   31st

December, 2008 are not applicable so far as the NITs are concerned

and this fact was clarified by the MHRD in its later guidelines dated

18th August, 2009 followed by 14th March, 2012 and this fact has

been completely overlooked by the Division Bench while placing

reliance on the guidelines dated 31st December, 2008.

29. We would like to observe that the guidelines issued by the

MHRD   from   time  to   time   for   revision   of   pay   structure  and   redesignation of the teachers in NITs are in the form of accelerated

promotions,   remain   co­terminus   with   the   person   and   are   not

related to post based promotions under the relevant recruitment

rules, however, such scheme is not available under the Act, 2007

and   after   the   amendment   notification   dated   21st  July,   2017,

Schedule ‘E’ has been appended in exercise of power under the

clause 23(5)(a) of the statute laying down the qualifications and

other terms and conditions of appointment of academic staff to be

made through open advertisement on the recommendations of the

26

selection   committee   until   exempted   under   the   scheme   of   these

rules.

30. To clarify it further, CAS scheme by its very nomenclature

called Career Advancement Scheme introduced for teachers like

Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP), later called MACP for

Central   Government   employees   to   overcome   the   problem   of

stagnation and hardship faced due to lack of adequate promotion

avenues,   it   nowhere   tinker   with   the   conditions   of   eligibility   for

appointment to the cadre posts included in schedule ‘E’ annexed to

the statute pursuant to which qualifications and other terms and

conditions   of   appointment   of   academic   staff   are   included   vide

notification dated 21st July 2017.

31. Before parting with the judgment, we would like to observe

that since the respondent teachers are working in the AGP Rs.9000

pursuant to the orders though may not be legally sustainable but it

is not the case of the appellants that they are not eligible for AGP

Rs.9000 and for re­designation as Associate Professor.  In the given

facts and circumstances, we consider it appropriate to observe that

let the respondent teachers may continue for the time being and the

27

appellants   may   initiate   the   process   to   consider   the   respondent

teachers for pay band of Rs. 37400­67000 with AGP Rs.9000 and

for re­designation as Associate Professor in terms of the guidelines

dated 14th March, 2012 and 18th March 2013.  Such exercise may

be undertaken within a period of four months and further course of

action   may   be   taken   in   terms   of   the   recommendations   of   the

selection   committee   and   if   they   are   found   suitable,   benefits   be

granted from the date of their suitability being adjudged and any of

the respondent teachers, if aggrieved by the recommendations made

by the selection committee/approval by the BOG, will be at liberty

to avail such remedy which the law permits.

32. The appeals accordingly succeed and are hereby allowed with

the above observations and the judgment passed by the Division

Bench dated 31st July, 2018 is hereby set aside.  No costs.

33. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.

        ………………………J.

 (AJAY RASTOGI)

………………………J.

28

 (ABHAY S. OKA)

NEW DELHI

MARCH 30, 2022

29