UMESH CHANDRA PANDEY Vs. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ the challenge is to the order dated 20 th July, 2001 of respondent No. 2, Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapeeth, Katwaria Sarai, New Delhi-110016 and also its order dated 12th October, 2001, whereby the representation dated 1st August, 2001 of the petitioner was rejected.

(2.) The petitioner was initially appointed by Rashtriya Sanskrit Sansthan, Shastri Bhawan, New Delhli, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Sansthan') and was posted as Librarian at Sri Sadasiva Kendriya Sanskrit Vidyapeetha, Puri with effect from 30.07.1974. The age of superannuation of the post was 58 years. The post was temporary, but likely to continue and was transferable anywhere in India. In April, 1976 he was transferred to the institute of Shri Lal Bahadur Shastri Rashtriya Sanskrit Vidyapeetha (hereinafter referred to as 'the employer') at New Delhi. It is seen from the record that in addition to his duty as Librarian, the petitioner was also taking teaching classes.

(3.) Since the petitioner continued to work with the employer, he was accordingly offered appointment to the post of Librarian in the Pay Scale of Rs.2,200/- to Rs.4,000/- along with his personal promotion in the pay scale of Rs.3,700/- to Rs.5,700/- plus other allowances as admissible under the Rules. In the meantime, vide office order dated 7th May, 1983 of the Sansthan, the petitioner was appointed to the post of Librarian with effect from 01.11.1981 in the substantive capacity. In the offer of appointment issued by employer vide order dated 30.10.1991, it was stated that the service rendered by the petitioner in the Sansthan shall be counted for pension and other service benefits as admissible under the Rules of the employee and his present service conditions would not be altered to his disadvantage. It was also stipulated that his duty and responsibility with the employer shall be governed in the light of the guidelines issued by the University Grants Commission vide their letter dated 18/26.11.1988. The petitioner accepted the appointment offer of the employer on 12.12.1981 and subsequently vide office order dated 12.12.1981, he was appointed as Librarian with effect from 01.11.1981. It was mentioned in the said order that since he was working as Librarian, he will be getting his personal promotion in the pay scale of Rs.3,700/- to Rs.5,700/-. The employer in its meeting held on 19.12.1984 decided that the Librarians were to be treated as Readers as per guidelines of UGC i.e. respondent No. 1 and accordingly all the benefits available to the teachers were extended to the Librarians of the employer including the date of retirement to be 60 years as were for the teaching staff of the employer. In response to the representation of the petitioner, the employer vide their letter dated 16.12.1986 informed him that the age of superannuation of the Librarian was 60 years. Subsequently, vide office order date 27 th November, 1997, the petitioner was promoted from the post of Reader to Professor in the pay scale of Rs.4,500/- to Rs.5,700/- on the recommendation of the Selection Committee with effect from 27.11.1997. Subsequent upon his promotion in the pay scale of Rs.4,500/- to Rs.5,700/- vide office order dated 27.11.1997, the pay scale of the petitioner was fixed at Rs.4,500/- to Rs.5,700/- with effect from 27.11.1997.