JEE G Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in W.P.(C) No. 27017 of 2017 are before us challenging the judgment dated 11.4.2018 of the learned Single Judge dismissing the same.

(2.) The appellants are working as Assistant Professors in Sree Sankara College, Kalady which is a College affiliated to the Mahatma Gandhi University. All of them entered service on various dates in the year 2005 and have been continuously working, ever since. The UGC has under the UGC Regulations on Minimum Qualifications for Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and Other Measures for the Maintenance of the Standards of Higher Education, 2010 ('UGC Regulations, 2010' for short) stipulated guidelines for selection for the Career Advancement Schemes for teachers and other academic staff in Universities and Colleges. As per the Scheme, what is stipulated is a Performance Based Appraisal System (PBAS) where an analysis of the merit and credentials of an incumbent is made on the basis of weightage given to the performance of each teacher based on Academic Performance Indicators (API). Though the Regulations were issued in the year 2010 with a stipulation that the PBAS was to be implemented within a period of three months therefrom, it is pointed out by the appellants that no action was taken for implementing the same by the MG University. Consequently, no system of objectively recording the performance of teachers either in the Colleges or the University was followed. Later on, the system of PBAS was modified by an Amendment in 2013 and still later in the year 2016 by the UGC. It was only thereafter that, the MG University issued Ext.P2 on 23.2017 containing the necessary stipulations for implementing the PBAS. The appraisal form that had to be submitted by each incumbent is evidenced by Ext.P3 Pro forma. Since as per Ext.P2, the requirement of satisfying a performance based assessment is given effect to from 2010 onwards, it is contended by the appellants that they are seriously prejudiced. In view of the various parameters on which data is required to be furnished as per Ext.P3, it is contended that, the whole system would be unworkable. Consequently, the appellants would be denied their rightful promotions to the higher posts, such as Associate Professor, Professor and so on. Therefore, they had filed the writ petition seeking the issue of a writ of certiorari, setting aside Ext.P2 to the extent, the API score based PBAS for Career Advancement was given effect to from 2010 onwards.

(3.) The contentions of the petitioners were opposed by the University by filing a counter affidavit. According to the University, the UGC Scheme had been approved by the Government with effect from 18.9.2010 and the appellants were being paid higher salary under the said Scheme. According to the counter affidavit, the University had adopted the Scheme and notified the requirements of the Scheme by University letter dated 1.8.2011 and that Ext.P2 was only an amendment thereof. Therefore, the contention that the API score based on performance was introduced only in the year 2017 giving retrospective effect from 2010 was denied. Reliance was placed on the dictum of a Full Bench of this Court in Dr. Radhakrishna Pillai v. Travancore Devaswom Board, (2016) 2 KLT 245 (245)) to contend that, the provisions of the UGC Regulations were applicable to all the Universities and Colleges without any specific adoption by the University concerned. Therefore, it was contended that the writ petition was only to be dismissed.