SANKARA NARAYANAN V R Vs. A P GOPINATHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The main challenge in the Writ Petitions is the requirement of a University degree for the promotion to the post of Section Officer prescribed by the Syndicate in its resolution dated 16/12/2000. The post of Selection Grade Assistant is the feeder category for promotion to the post of Section Officer. Formerly, no particular educational qualification was prescribed for the post of Section Officer. By Ext. P5 resolution dated 26/07/2000 in WP (C) No. 36498 of 2000 passed in the joint meeting of the Standing Committee, it was recommended as follows:

(2.) First we shall consider the argument that there is no nexus for the requirement of higher qualification. It is the admitted fact that the post of Section Officer is a supervisory post. The University is not only dealing with the under graduate students but also students who are studying for post graduate and Doctorate courses. A large number of employees are working in the University. As per the new amendment even Assistant Grade II post requires degree. Therefore almost all the Assistants have degree. It is true that in the feeder category the appointments also are made from direct recruits and the promotion is at the ratio of 2:1. But once they are merged into one service, they became single category and therefore for their further promotion, only the required qualification in the promotion post need be looked into. Those who have not the required qualification is not entitled to be promoted. The employees who are in service also bound by valid amendments as there is no fundamental right or vested right for promotion. Of course, those who got promotion as per the existing rules cannot be reverted because of the subsequent change in the service rules. These matters were settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Jammu & Kashmir v. Triloki Nath Khosa, AIR 1974 SC 1 : 1974 (1) SCC 19 : 1974 Lab IC 1 : 1974 SCC (Lab) 49 : 1974 (1) SCR 771 : 1974 SCC (L&S) 49 and T. R. Kapur and Others v. State of Haryana and Others, 1986 KHC 576 : AIR 1987 SC 415 : 1986 Supp SCC 584 . Recently, the Supreme Court in P. Venugopal v. Union of India, 2008 KHC 4673 : 2008 (5) SCC 1 held that a person entering into Government service is no doubt liable to be dealt with by the relevant Act or the Rules as amended but it ceases to be so in the event of his success in challenging the constitutional validity of the same. A person appointed in Government service acquires a status and his service conditions are determined by service rules or statutory rules and not by contrary or inconsistent terms of contract, and such terms and conditions of service can be unilaterally altered by the Government. However, such amendment should not be unconstitutional. A University degree is made compulsory for promotion to the post of Section Officer by service rules. It cannot be stated that the existing employees in the University when the amendment was introduced are not bound by the same. The contention that there is no nexus in fixing the qualification of University degree for the post of Section Officer also cannot be accepted by us. Only if the qualification fixed is arbitrary, this Court can interfere. The post of Section Officer is a supervisory post. It cannot be stated that the fixation of University degree for promotion is illegal or discriminatory, so as to violate Art.14 of the Constitution especially even for direct recruitment for Assistant Grade II itself graduation is made compulsory. Considering the nature of duties of Section Officer and considering the availability of graduates in the feeder category, it cannot be stated that the fixation of University degree as a minimum qualification for promotion to the post of Section Officer is illegal so as to warrant interference of this Court. The fixation of qualification in the promotion post cannot be held to be discriminatory. Similar issue was considered by a Full Bench of this Court in Subaida Beevi, S. v. State of Kerala and Others, 2005 KHC 69 : ILR 2005 (1) Ker. 30 : 2005 (1) KLT 426 after considering various Supreme Court decisions. Therefore, we are of the view that fixation of University degree as basic qualification cannot be faulted and it cannot be said that there is no nexus in fixing any such qualification for promotion to the post of Section Officer.

(3.) Then the question is when this amendment will come into effect. The Syndicate at its meeting on 16/12/2000 decided that the University degree must be made compulsory for promotion to the post of Section Officer. But to avoid an immediate shock to the persons expecting promotions the Syndicate also decided not to implement the amendment till 31/12/2002, so that the immediate expectations are not spoiled. S.23 of the Calicut University Act, 1975, (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') which gives powers to the Syndicate to make amendment to service. S.23(ii) of the Act gives power to the Syndicate to make Ordinance and to amend or repeal the same. With regard to amendment of the statute, it can only propose the amendment for consideration of the Senate as can be seen in sub clause (iii). S.36 of the Act also states that subject to the provisions of this Act and the Statutes, the Syndicate shall have power to make Ordinances providing for all or any of the matters mentioned therein including the fixation of the scales of pay of various posts in the University and the terms and conditions of service of officers of the University. S.37 of the Act deals with procedure for making Ordinance. But S.37(4) of the Act makes it clear that no Ordinance involving expenditure shall be valid or come into force until assented to by the Chancellor.