CHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION Vs. ANURAG SANKHIAN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Chandigarh Administration has filed the instant writ petition challenging the order dated 17.2.2012 (Annexure P4) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), whereby O.A. No.842-CH of 2011 filed by respondent No.1 was allowed and the petitioner was directed to grant two advance increments to him with effect from 1.3.2008, i.e., the date on which he acquired the doctorate degree, along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum, till the payment of arrears. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated 24.4.2012 (Annexure P6), whereby the review application filed by the petitioner was dismissed.

(2.) We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. In the present case, respondent No.1 joined the petitioner-college as Lecturer in Geography in the year 2003. At the time of his appointment, he was having qualification of M.A. Geography, M.Ed, M.Phil along with SLET in Geography. He being an M.Phil, was granted two advance increments. In the year 2008, respondent No.1 acquired Ph.D. degree. Thereafter he moved an application for grant of two advance increments in view of Clause 6.4.0 of U.G.C. Notification dated 24.12.1998. When the petitioner rejected the claim of respondent No.1, he filed the aforesaid O.A. before the Tribunal for grant of two advance increments in view of the aforesaid Clause. Vide impugned order, the said O.A. was allowed.

(3.) It was held by the Tribunal that the contention of the petitioner that the case of respondent No.1 falls under Clause 6.2.0 was not tenable as it will result into discrimination for want of any rationality. His case falls under Clause 6.4.0 which provides that a teacher will be eligible for two advance increments as and when she/he acquires a Ph.D. Degree in her/his service career. It has been found as a fact that similar benefit has been given to similarly situated employees.