ANJALI PATTANAIK Vs. BERHAMPUR UNIVERSITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner was appointed as Lecturer in Home Science on 7/12/1984 in Berhampur University. Prior to that she was working as Lecturer in Home Science in an aided College namely, Sri Satyasai College for Women, Bhubaneswar from 6/12/1982 to 4/12/1984. On completion of 8 years of service including her past service, she was placed in the senior scale by order dtd. 9/5/1994 w.e.f. 6/12/1990. By such time she had completed one Orientation course from Utkal University, which was from 24/10/1989 to 22/11/1989. She was also awarded Ph.D. degree from Utkal University on 20/8/1991. Thereafter she completed second Orientation course from Utkal University from 19/11/1991 to 13/12/1991 and first Refresher course from SNDT Women's University, Bombay, from 7/11/1994 to 26/11/1994. She also participated in National Workshop on 'Folkloristic' from 7/1/1994 to 16/1/1994 organized by Central Institute of Languages, Mysore. On 12/4/1994 she requested the University authorities to forward her name for an Orientation course being organized by Utkal University, but the same was turned down by letter dtd. 3/5/1994 on the ground that she had already attended two such courses as per the guidelines of U.G.C. The selection committee of the University considered her application for promotion to the post of Reader and recommended her name which was finally approved by the Syndicate. As such, the Petitioner was promoted to the post of Reader by order dtd. 7/1/1997 w.e.f. 6/12/1995. As per circular dtd. 6/11/2004 for promotion to the post of Professor, the Petitioner applied for the same as by then she had completed 8 years of service as Reader since 2003 and had Ph.D. and D.Lit. Degree from Utkal University. The Selection Committee recommended her name, which was placed before the Syndicate Sub-committee and the Syndicate for approval. Finally, the recommendation was placed before the Chancellor after approval was accorded by the syndicate. While the matter stood thus, she was served with a show cause notice issued by the Registrar of the University asking her to show cause as to why the order of the Chancellor shall not be implemented. The Chancellor had observed that she was required to undergo 4 Refresher courses, two before placement as Lecturer senior scale and two before placement as Reader, but she had completed only 3 Refresher courses. Being thus deficient of one Refresher course, her further career advancement to the post of Professor cannot be permitted till she fulfils the stipulation of undergoing one Refresher course. The Petitioner submitted her reply by letter dtd. 5/1/2007 that after being promoted as Reader she had never received any communication from the University authority to attend Refresher/Orientation course and that her name was duly recommended by the Syndicate after being scrutinized by the Syndicate Sub-committee. Her promotion to the post of Reader was never questioned. Subsequently, the Petitioner was allowed to undergo Refresher course from 13/3/2008 to 2/4/2008 organized by Utkal University. Ultimately, by order dtd. 31/10/2009 she was promoted to the post of Professor w.e.f. 2/4/2008. Thereafter she submitted representations to the Chancellor to prepone her date of promotion to 6/12/2003, the date on which she was eligible. After several reminders, her representation was rejected by order dtd. 6/6/2016. According to the Petitioner, the so called deficiency in undergoing Orientation/Refresher courses had been exempted by the University authorities at the relevant time because she possessed a Ph.D. degree. Therefore, the so- called deficiency could not have been agitated after so many years. In any case, she cannot be blamed for not fulfilling the requirement because her request to permit her to undergo Orientation/Refresher courses had been turned down by the University authorities at the relevant time. It is also stated that the Syndicate is the competent authority in matters of promotion as per the provisions of the Odisha University Act, 1989 and the Chancellor is the Appellate authority. Therefore, the Syndicate could not have recommended her case for promotion to the Chancellor. On such facts, the Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition with the following prayer;

(2.) Separate counter affidavits have been filed by Berhampur University, U.G.C. and the Chancellor. In its counter, the Berhampur University, while not disputing the facts has referred to the letter dtd. 14/8/2001 issued by the Chancellor requiring his approval before issuing order of promotions under CAS irrespective of the U.G.C recommendations.

(3.) The U.G.C. in its counter has reiterated that the Petitioner is required to undergo 4 Refresher courses, i.e. two before placement in the grade of Lecturer Senior Scale and two before placement in grade of Reader, but the Petitioner completed only three Refresher courses. She was promoted to the grade of Professor only when she completed the second Refresher course. Reference has also be made to the U.G.C. Notification, 1998 and in particular, Clause 7.2.0 (ii) and 7.4.1(v) and 7.7.0.