SUNIL KUMAR VYAS Vs. CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI, DELHI SECRETARIAT, I.P. ESTATE, NEW DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Instant Original Application has been instituted for the following reliefs:

(2.) Pleadings of the parties may be summarized as follows: The applicant has come with the assertion that he was appointed on the post of Demonstrator in the UGC pay scale of Rs.1740 -3000 w.e.f. 02.11.1988 vide order dated 01.11.1988 on compassionate grounds after the sad demise of his father. UGC pay scale of Rs.1740 -3000 was made applicable to the teaching faculty of the College with prior sanction and approval of the Lt. Governor, Delhi, vide Delhi Administration order dated 30.03.1988, effective from 01.01.1986. Thereafter, the post of Demonstrator in the pay scale of Rs.1740 -3000 in A&U Tibbia College was re -designated as Lecturer in the pay scale of Rs.2200 -4000 as per the mandate of the Central Council of Indian Medicine, New Delhi, the apex body to regulate education in Indian medicine, vide order dated 09.05.1991, in order to maintain parity in the teaching posts recommended by the University Grants Commission (UGC). The A&U Tibbia College changed the nomenclature and re -designated the post of Demonstrator as Lecturer of all incumbents working as Demonstrators, re -designating them as Lecturers and placing them in the UGC pay scale of Rs.2200 -4000. However, the applicant was left out as the lone person to work as Demonstrator, which, according to the applicant, would show the biased and discriminatory attitude of the respondents, and would be violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The applicant has been denied the pay scale granted to his similarly placed colleagues/teachers working in the College. It is pleaded that the case of the applicant is covered by the judgment of the Honble Apex Court in M. R. Gupta v Union of India and others [1995 SCC (L&S) 1273]. The Lecturers so designated and placed in the pay scale of Rs.2200 -4000 were further promoted under Merit Promotion Scheme to the post of Reader in the pay scale of Rs.3700 -5700+NPA w.e.f. 01.12.1996, but the applicant has been deprived of his genuine and legitimate right to promotion at par with his other similarly placed colleagues/teachers working in the respondent institution. The Lecturers were promoted under Merit Promotion Scheme, but the applicant was denied the pay scale of Rs.2200 -4000 (pre -revised) and further promotion as Reader in the pay scale of Rs.3700 -5700 (pre -revised), solely on the ground that his appointment as Demonstrator in the UGC pay scale was on compassionate ground and ad hoc. It is pleaded that the compassionate appointment is always regular appointment and is given against a sanctioned post, but the respondents deliberately and willfully adopted harassive attitude towards the applicant with the intention to stagnate the applicant on the same post right from the date of appointment till his superannuation. A&U Tibbia College and its allied units were taken over by the Government of NCT of Delhi under the Delhi Tibbia College (Takeover) Act, 1997 with effect from 01.05.1998, and the employees of the College who had been working on the aforesaid date were regulated by Section 7 of the said Act. Appointment of the employees of the College as employees of the Government was to be treated as part of the initial constitution. It is alleged that thereafter the applicant was placed under suspension with mala fide intention and a disciplinary enquiry was initiated against him, but he was exonerated and his suspension was revoked vide order dated 01.09.2009 with consequential benefits. However, an order was passed by the respondents on 25.11.2009 fixing the pay of the applicant lowering his UGC pay scale at the time of appointment in the post of Demonstrator, i.e., Rs.1740 -3000 [later re -designated as Lecturer in the pay scale of Rs.2200 -4000/8000 -13500 (Group A)] to Rs.5500 -175 -9000 (Group B non -gazetted) arbitrarily, whereas all his other colleagues/teachers working in the college were granted the pay scale of Rs.2200 -4000/8000 -13500 (Group A) and they were re -designated as Lecturer from Demonstrator, but the applicant continued to remain in the lower pay scale of Rs.5500 -9000 (Group B). That the attitude of the respondents is discriminatory and hostile, and hence the O.A.

(3.) The respondents have contested the case and filed their counter reply denying the allegations made in the O.A. However, it has been pleaded that the applicant was appointed as Demonstrator on ad hoc basis in the UGC pay scale on compassionate ground on the demise of his father while in service. As a consequence of taking over of the institution by the Government of NCT of Delhi with effect from 01.05.1998, all the staff is drawing salary as per the recommendations of the Fifth and Sixth Pay Commission. It is pleaded that the pay of the applicant has also been fixed as per the recommendations of the Pay Commission, and that there is no anomaly in the fixation which may give rise to filing of the O.A. The post of Demonstrator was never re -designated as Lecturer by the Government of NCT of Delhi. One post of Demonstrator still exists in the institution, for which continuation of post is still obtained from the competent authority. According to the Tibbia College Act, 1952, the posts of Reader, Sr. Lecturer Grade -I, Jr. Lecturer and Demonstrator were in existence. In 1985, the posts of Sr. Lecturer Grade -I and Jr. Lecturer were amalgamated as Lecturer. CCIM is the apex body to regulate education in Indian medicine. There had not been any change of nomenclature of the post of Demonstrator as Lecturer. Other colleagues of the applicant were promoted as Lecturer and they cannot be equated with the applicant. The Demonstrators were promoted as Lecturers in the pay scale of Rs.2200 -4000 against the vacant posts of Lecturers. It is a fact that the appointment on compassionate ground is against regular post. At the time of the appointment of the applicant, a post of Demonstrator was lying vacant and the applicant was possessing the qualification, and hence he was appointed. The post of Demonstrator is Group B post and as per rules as regards compassionate appointments, an applicant may get job of Group C and D posts, and, therefore, the applicant was appointed on ad hoc basis, which fact he never disputed. Whatever has been alleged in the OA is denied and the OA is sought to be dismissed being devoid of merit.