P RAMASAMY Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Appellant is a professor of Zoology in the University of Madras. He is aggrieved by the appointment of the respondent Dr. Arumugam also as a professor. Both of them possess master and doctoral degrees. While the respondent Dr. Arumugam was appointed as lecturer on 11.11.83, the appellant was appointed to that post on 4.4.85, a year and half later. While they were serving as lecturers, the University adopted a scheme called merit based career development scheme for teachers, the object of which scheme was stated as, "This scheme is an achievement oriented scheme with the inner motive that only deserving teachers could get the benefit. It is mainly for recognition of achievement". The respondent Dr. Arumugam was promoted as Reader under that scheme with effect from 16.3.90, when he became eligible for consideration under that scheme, by an order dated 6.10.94. The appellant was appointed as a reader, according to him by direct recruitment, on 19.5.90. The respondent Dr. Arumugam was promoted as professor on 16.3.96 and the petitioner on 19.5.96. We are informed that Dr. Arumugam is now functioning as Head of the department of Zoology.

(2.) In the counter affidavit filed by the Registrar of the University in the writ petition it is stated that the University had adopted the career development schemes with cut of dates 30.12.92, 30.12.96 and 30.12.98 and that promotions were given from the post of lecturer to Reader to 67, 30 and 5 persons under the schemes I, II and III respectively. It is also stated that 90 readers were promoted to the post of professors under career development scheme I; 48 persons were promoted under career development scheme II to the post of professors and under scheme III, 61 persons were so promoted to the post of professors. It is further stated in that affidavit that 61 of the 301 teachers who had been given the benefit of that scheme have availed the promotion twice i.e. from lecturer to Reader and Reader to professor. It is also averred that professors promoted under that scheme have functioned as heads of department and they have also held membership of the academic council, senate and syndicate by virtue of their being professors.

(3.) The grievance of the appellant, who was the writ petitioner, was that he should be ranked senior to the respondent Dr.Arumugam as according to him those given promotions under career development scheme were ineligible to be treated as belonging to the cadre of Reader or professor as the case may be as the promotions given to them were personal to them and those posts would cease to exist on their retirement. That contention was rejected by the learned single Judge. Similar contention that those promoted under the merit based career development scheme are not to be regarded as holding the regular posts in the cadre of professor or the reader as the case may be had been considered and rejected by another learned single Judge of this Court in W.P. No: 14137 of 1996, etc. decided on 29.11.96. It was held therein that the provision of the Madras University Act did not make a distinction between those appointed under the merit based promotion scheme and those appointed pursuant to the advertisement of vacancies and making a selection from among the applicants for the post.