S INDIRANI Vs. COMMISSIONER OF COLLEGIATE EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE appeal is directed against the order of the learned Single Judge dated 9. 4. 2007 made in W. P. No. 6599 of 1998, dismissing the writ petition filed by the appellant.

(2.) IN the writ petition, the petitioner/appellant herein challenged the order of the Directorate of Collegiate Education dated 26. 2. 1998, by which the Director had rejected the representations of the petitioner/appellant herein dated 12. 9. 1994 and 15. 11. 1994, by deciding that the services rendered by the appellant in the third respondent/college, which is an aided private college, governed by the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Private Colleges (Regulation) Act, 1976, between the period 1. 3. 1984 and 26. 5. 1986, during which period she was working as an Assistant Professor on temporary basis and was not having the required minimum qualification, and therefore, cannot be considered for the purpose of claiming the benefits of the Career Advancement Programme.

(3.) THE appellant was appointed as an Assistant Professor, Home Science in the third respondent/college. At the time of appointment, she was having the qualification of M. Sc. and B. Ed. Degree. As per Section 15 of the Act, the fourth respondent/madurai Kamaraj University is empowered to prescribe the qualification for appointment of teachers. It appears that at the time of her appointment in 1984 in the third respondent/college, she had applied for exemption from the fourth respondent/university, under which the third respondent/college was affiliated. The fourth respondent/ University has granted exemption in respect of the appointment of the appellant, who was not having the minimum required qualification at that time, for the academic years 1983-1984, 1984-1985 and 1985-1986, and it was based on the exemption granted by the fourth respondent/ University, the appellant was paid salary by the Deputy Director of Collegiate Education for those years. 3. 2. It is seen that, thereafter, she has acquired the required qualification in the year 1986 and based on the said additional qualification acquired by her, the affiliating University approved her appointment in the third respondent/college from 26. 5. 1986 to hold the post of Assistant Professor in the regular capacity and the same was also approved by the Director of Collegiate Education. 3. 3. However, by virtue of the University Grants Commission notification, the appellant was re-designated as Lecturer (Senior Scale) by the second respondent. As per the Career Advancement Programme introduced by the University Grants Commission, accelerated scale of pay was also given. The appellant, claiming that she is entitled to Senior Scale of pay by counting her services during the years 1983-1984, 1984-1985 and 1985-1986, made a representation to the Director of Collegiate Education and the same was rejected.