Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 29th November, 2024
RAMBIR .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Suyash Srivastava, Mr. Manish Pandey, Mr. Abhishek Tiwari, Mr. Parvez Alam and Mr. Prashant Shukla, Advocates.
AND ORS. .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Monika Arora, Mr. Subhrodeep Saha and Ms. Radhika Kurdukar, Advocates for
Respondent No.2/JNU.
Mr. Apoorv Kurup and Ms. Gauri Goburdhun, Advocates for Respondent No.3/UGC.
JUDGEMENT
JYOTI SINGH, J. (ORAL)
JUDGMENT
1. By this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Petitioner lays a challenge to order dated 04.07.2019 whereby Petitioner was informed that the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) held on 14.06.2019 had rejected the request of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Librarian as there is no provision for promotion of Professional Assistant to the said post under the ‘University Grants Commission (Minimum Qualifications for Appointment of Teachers and other Academic Staff in Universities and Colleges and other Measures for the maintenance of Standards in Higher Education) Regulations, 2018’ (‘2018 Regulations’). Challenge is also laid to Notification dated 15.04.2019 issued by Respondent No.2/Jawaharlal Nehru University (‘University’) notifying that post of Assistant Librarian would be filled up 100% by direct recruitment in accordance with provisions contained in 2018 Regulations and order dated 21.05.2019 whereby Petitioner’s request for promotion has been rejected.
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, factual narrative to the extent relevant and as averred in the writ petition is that Petitioner, who belongs to the Scheduled Caste category, was appointed as Professional Assistant with the University on 10.09.2010 and claims that after continuous service of 5 years on 10.09.2015, he became eligible for consideration for promotion to the post of Assistant Librarian as per the applicable Recruitment Rules and the applicable policy on reservation in promotions. As per the said RRs filed by the Petitioner, appointment to post of Assistant Librarian is 50% by promotion from the feeder cadre of Professional Assistant, subject to ‘Good’ record of work and 05 years’ continuous service and fulfilling the minimum qualifications i.e. B.A. or equivalent and M.Lib. with minimum 2nd division in both or M.A. or equivalent and B.Lib. with minimum 2nd division in both and 50% is by direct recruitment. It is nobody’s case that these RRs have been amended.
3. Petitioner avers that he acquired Bachelor of Arts degree with 3rd Division in 1995 and Bachelor in Library and Information Science (B.Lib.) degree in 2000 as well as M.Lib. with 1st Division in 2008. On 03.03.2017, seniority list was published by the University in which name of the Petitioner was at Serial No.1 and he was thus eligible for promotion on all scores. In this background, Petitioner claimed consideration for promotion against Roster Point earmarked for SC category as on 06.06.2017. In the meantime, Petitioner took admission in Uttarakhand Open University, Haldwani to pursue Masters degree course with permission of the University.
4. It is stated that DPC for promotion to 02 posts of Assistant Librarian was held on 14.09.2017, out of which one vacancy was for unreserved category and the other was reserved for SC category. The vacancy in unreserved category was filled by Ms. Ganga Thapliyal while the SC vacancy remained unfilled since as per the University, Petitioner was not eligible. Aggrieved by his non-promotion, Petitioner filed W.P.(C) 705/2018 in this Court seeking a direction to consider him for promotion. The writ petition was disposed of on 24.01.2018 with a direction to the Petitioner to prefer a representation within one week and a further direction to the University to decide the same by a speaking order. Court protected the Petitioner by directing that status quo shall be maintained with respect to the one unfilled vacancy earmarked for SC category.
5. It is further averred that Petitioner preferred a representation dated 31.01.2018, which was decided vide order dated 20.02.2018, rejecting the claim of the Petitioner on the ground that he did not possess the required M.A degree. After acquiring the M.A. degree, Petitioner made an application dated 14.03.2019 bringing to the knowledge of the University that he had completed his M.A. degree course and also furnished the marksheet with a request to update his service book. In the meantime, another seniority list of Professional Assistants was published by the University on 26.03.2019 and Petitioner was again at Serial No. 1. On 10.04.2019, Petitioner submitted his provisional M.A degree dated 08.04.2019 along with final consolidated marksheet but as averred, this qualification has not yet been updated in his Service Book.
6. Petitioner states that despite fulfilling the minimum educational qualification, University did not consider him for promotion and this led to filing of a second writ petition being W.P. (C) No. 6024/2019 in which the Court directed the University to place his case before a DPC and take a final decision as per applicable Rules. In compliance of order of this Court dated 27.05.2019, DPC was convened on 14.06.2019 but Petitioner was not considered for promotion on the ground that there is no provision for promotion to the post of Assistant Librarian under the 2018 Regulations. University also published a Notification dated 15.04.2019 stating that appointment to the post of Assistant Librarian will only be through direct recruitment and consequently, by letter dated 21.05.2019, Petitioner’s request for consideration for promotion was rejected.
7. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that albeit earlier his case was not considered for promotion to the post of Assistant Librarian on the ground that he was not fulfilling the requisite educational criteria as per the applicable RRs but having acquired the M.A. degree on 08.03.2019 and being at seniority position No. 1, Petitioner became eligible for promotion against the vacancy earmarked for SC category as per the roster. It is urged that the RRs that were applicable in 2017 when the DPC was held and 01 vacancy in the UR category was filled, stipulated that 50% of the posts of Assistant Librarian shall be filled by promotion and to the best of the knowledge of the Petitioner and as per the material on record, even after the University has filed two affidavits in this Court, the said RRs have not been amended and continue to govern the field. In view of the applicable RRs, Petitioner is eligible for consideration for promotion being in the SC category, fulfilling all educational qualifications and being at serial No. 1 in the seniority list as the SC vacancy is still unfilled.
8. It is further contended that claim of the Petitioner has been wrongly rejected by the University on the ground that as per 2018 Regulations and UGC letter dated 08.03.2019, whereby clarification was given to the University, there is no provision for promotion of Professional Assistant to the post of Assistant Librarian. A plain reading of clause 4.[7] of 2018 Regulations, on which reliance is placed by the University, shows that this only provides minimum qualifications for direct recruitment to the post of University Assistant Librarian/College Librarian etc. but does not deal with the modes of appointment, which continues to be as per the University RRs. There is nothing in the 2018 Regulations which even remotely suggests that the mode of appointment to the post of Assistant Librarian has been changed to ‘100% by direct recruitment’. Mode of appointment to the post of Assistant Librarian in the University continues to be governed by its RRs providing for 50% promotion and 50% direct recruitment.
9. It is argued that in response to an application under Right to Information Act, 2005, UGC has clarified in its reply dated 20.07.2019 that it has not notified any uniform service conditions for non-teaching staff of Central Universities and Universities on their own frame their Cadre Recruitment Rules and lay down the qualifications, promotion policies etc. It is also pointed out that in many other Central and other Universities promotion to the post of Assistant Librarian continues to be through promotion and direct recruitment in the given ration and illustratively reference is made to documents filed with the rejoinder which are Cadre Recruitment Rules of a few Universities such as University of Karnataka and Jamia Hamdard.
10. Ms. Monika Arora, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the University, relying on the affidavits filed, submits that it is true that a vacancy in the post of Assistant Librarian had arisen in the SC category and a DPC was held in 2017, but Petitioner was not fulfilling the requisite educational qualifications at that stage and was not promoted. Petitioner sought permission from the department on 06.06.2017 to pursue the M.A. degree course, which was granted and Petitioner completed the degree course and submitted his marksheet as well as provisional degree certificate with a request to update his service book vide letter dated 10.04.2019. However, in the meantime, 2018 Regulations were notified by UGC and Clause 4.[7] thereof provided that the post will be filled 100% through direct recruitment. Thus there being no provision for promotion of Professional Assistants, Petitioner cannot be considered for appointment to the said post.
11. It is further submitted that the University adopted 2018 Regulations on 05.10.2018 in the 147th meeting of Academic Council and discontinued promotions to the post of Assistant Librarian and commenced filling all posts through direct recruitment. In fact, by way of abundant caution, vide letter dated 02.01.2019, the University sought clarification from UGC as to whether promotions could continue to the post of Assistant Librarian from the feeder cadre of Professional Assistant, to which a clarification was received from UGC vide letter dated 08.03.2019, stating that there was no provision of promotion in the 2018 Regulations. Hence, Professional Assistants are now only eligible for grant of financial upgradations under ACP/MACP Schemes, notified by DoPT.
12. Ms. Monika contends that Universities are bound by the UGC Regulations and in case of any contravention thereof, their grants can be withheld. Accordingly, University discontinued the promotion norms and rules vide Notification dated 15.04.2019 and Petitioner was duly informed of the same after the DPC was convened on 14.06.2019. It is also submitted that in the year 2022, UGC has come up with Model Cadre Recruitment Rules for non-teaching and other academic posts and these also provide only for direct recruitment to the post of Assistant Librarian. Reliance is placed by Ms. Arora on the judgment of the Supreme Court in Professor (Dr.) Sreejith P.S. v. Dr. Rajasree M.S. and Others, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1473, to argue that Universities cannot take actions contrary to UGC Regulations and are bound to make appointment in consonance with them.
13. Insofar as UGC is concerned, a short affidavit has been filed which is not on record and another copy has been handed over during the course of hearing and with the consent of the parties is taken on record. Stand of the UGC is that there is no provision under 2018 Regulations for promotion to the post of Assistant Librarian from the feeder cadre of Professional Assistant.
14. Heard learned counsels for the parties and examined their rival submissions.
15. Petitioner was appointed as Professional Assistant on 10.09.2010 and as per applicable RRs of the University, Professional Assistant was the feeder cadre for the post of Assistant Librarian. RRs provide that 50% of the posts of Assistant Librarian shall be filled through the mode of promotion on seniority basis subject to ‘Good’ record of work and 05 years’ continuous service. Minimum educational qualification required is B.A. or equivalent and M.Lib. with minimum 2nd division in both or M.A. or equivalent and B.Lib. with minimum 2nd division in both. Relevant part of the RRs as filed with the petition and relied upon by the Petitioner are as follows:- “25.
RECRUITMENT TO THE POST OF ASSISTANT LIBRARIAN (PAY SCALE RS.2200-4000). a) 50 percent promotion on seniority from Professional Assistants subject to 'Good' record of work and five years continuous service and fulfilling the minimum qualifications i.e. B.A. or equivalent and M.Lib., with minimum of second division in both or M.A. or equivalent and B.Lib with minimum of second division in both. Provided that the cases of those candidates having third division in M.A. or equivalent and B.Lib can be considered by the Vice- Chancellor for promotion to the posts of assistant Librarian subject to the fulfillment of either of the following requirements:i) Knowledge of two foreign languages of the standard of Diploma course; or ii) Have published bibliography/ prepared index of high standard; or iii) Have published articles in renewed journals of Library Science; or iv) Have put in a minimum of ten years service and have 'Good' record of work. b) 50 percent by open recruitment.”
16. In 2017 DPC was held for promotion to the post of Assistant Librarian for filling up 02 vacancies, one in unreserved category and second in SC category as per Roster Point. It is a common ground between the parties to the lis that the DPC was as per the aforementioned RRs. The vacancy in the UR category was filled but the second vacancy remained unfilled as admittedly at that stage, Petitioner did not fulfil the minimum educational qualifications and was thus ineligible. However, Petitioner acquired M.A. degree in 2019 and requested the University to update his service book and consider him for promotion as Assistant Librarian. After two rounds of litigation DPC was convened on 14.06.2019, but Petitioner’s case was rejected on the ground that there was no provision for promotion under the 2018 Regulations which bind the University and University has notified on 15.04.2019 that henceforth there will be no promotion to the post of Assistant Librarian.
17. Broadly understood, Petitioner contends that the RRs which were applicable in 2017 were never amended and even otherwise the 2018 Regulations do not stipulate that the mode of promotion will 100% by direct recruitment. Clause 4.[7] only prescribes the minimum qualifications for appointment to the post of Assistant Librarian through direct recruitment. University and UGC, per contra, contend that after notification of 2018 Regulations there is no provision for promotion to the post of Assistant Librarian and the same can be filled only through direct recruitment.
18. The moot question that arises for consideration in light of the rival stands of the parties is whether promotion is one of the mode of recruitment to the post of Assistant Librarian in the University after Notification of 2018 Regulations. With the assistance of learned counsels for the parties, I have carefully examined 2018 Regulations, more particularly Clause 4.[7] thereof, which is extracted hereunder for ready reference: “4.[7] MINIMUM QUALIFICATIONS FOR DIRECT RECRUITMENT TO THE POSTS OF UNIVESRITY ASSISTANT LIBRARIAN / COLLEGE LIBRARIAN, UNIVERSITY DEPUTY LIBRARIAN AND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIAN
I. UNIVERSITY ASSISTANT LIBRARIAN / COLLEGE LIBRARIAN i) A Master's Degree in Library Science, Information Science or Documentation Science or an equivalent professional degree, with at least 55% marks (or an equivalent grade in a point -scale, wherever the grading system is followed) ii) A consistently good academic record, with knowledge of computerization of a library. iii) Besides fulfilling the above qualifications, the candidate must have cleared the National Eligibility Test (NET) conducted by the UGC, CSIR or similar test accredited by the UGC like SLET/SET or who are or have been awarded a Ph.D. Degree in accordance with the University Grants Commission (Minimum Standards and Procedure for Award of M.Phil./Ph.D. Degree) Regulations, 2009 or 2016 and their amendments from time to time as the case may be: Provided that the, candidates registered for the Ph.D. degree prior to July 1 1, 2009, shall be governed by the provisions of the then existing Ordinances / Bye-laws / Regulations of the Institution awarding the degree, and such Ph.D. candidates shall be exempted from the requirement of NET/SLET/SET for recruitment and appointment of Assistant Professor or equivalent positions in Universities/Colleges /Institutions subject to the fulfillment of the following conditions:a) The Ph.D. degree of the candidate has been awarded in the regular mode b) The Ph.D. thesis has been evaluated by at least two external examiners; c) Open Ph.D. viva voce of the candidate has been conducted; d) The candidate has published two research papers from his/her Ph.D. work out of which at least one is in a refereed journal; e) The candidate has presented at least two papers based on his/her Ph.D work in conferences/seminars sponsored /funded/supported by the UGC/ICSSR/CSIR or any similar agency. Note:
(i) The fulfilment of these conditions is to be certified by the Registrar or the Dean (Academic Affairs) of the University concerned. i) NET/SLET/SET shall also not be required for candidates in such Master's Programmes for which NET/SLET/SET is not conducted by the UGC, CSIR or similar test accredited by the UGC like SLET/SET.”
19. Plain reading of Clause 4.[7] shows that this provision only lays down the minimum qualifications for direct recruitment to various posts including the post of Assistant Librarian. Sub-clause (I)(i) provides the minimum educational qualifications and minimum percentage of marks required for eligibility to the post for those applying through direct recruitment and subclause (I)(ii) stipulates the requirement of a consistently good academic record with knowledge of computerisation of a library. Sub-clause (I)(iii) prescribes the requirement of clearing NET conducted by UGC, CSIR or a similar test accredited by UGC like SLET/SET as provided therein. I am unable to read anything in Clause 4.[7] which provides that post of Assistant Librarian will be filled 100% through direct recruitment. In fact, this clause does not even deal with the mode of recruitment and therefore, to this extent, contention of the University is rejected.
20. There is also merit in the submission of learned counsel for the Petitioner that the RRs of the University have not undergone any amendment till date and promotion continues to be the mode of recruitment to the extent of 50%. Significantly, even the UGC Regulations, 2010 has Clause 4.[5] which is similar to Clause 4.[7] in 2018 Regulations as aforementioned and despite this the University continued to resort to the method of promotion till 2017, when one Professional Assistant was promoted in the unreserved category. Clearly, 2018 Regulations only lay down the minimum qualification in Clause 4.[7] and in the absence of an amendment in the RRs of the University, changing the mode of recruitment, promotion will be one of the modes of appointment to the post of Assistant Librarian, where the feeder cadre is Professional Assistant. Concededly the RRs have not been amended.
21. There is no debate on the submission made by Ms. Arora that UGC Regulations bind the University but it is equally true that despite the earlier Regulations of 2010 notified by UGC, University was following its own RRs. From the stand of the University, it is crystal clear that only because the UGC wrote to the University by way of clarification that Professional Assistant cannot be promoted as an Assistant Librarian, the University followed the path of issuing a notification on 15.04.2019 that henceforth recruitment to the post of Assistant Librarian will be 100% by direct recruitment and this in turn was predicated on Clause 4.[7] of 2018 Regulations, which to my mind is no more than a misreading and misinterpretation of the said clause, which as held above does not do away with the promotion mode. Counsel for the Petitioner has buttressed his contentions by placing on record Recruitment Rules of several other universities such as Jamia Hamdard, Central University of Karnataka, etc. where post of Assistant Librarian continues to be filled up by promotion as well as by direct recruitment and no material has been brought on record by the University to controvert these documents or to show that these Universities have amended their RRs after the 2018 Regulations. Petitioner has also placed on record an important fact that in the reply dated 20.07.2019 to the application filed under RTI Act, UGC has clarified that it has not yet notified any uniform service conditions for non-teaching staff of Central Universities and the Universities frame their own cadre recruitment rules and lay down requisite qualifications, promotion policies, etc. Petitioner is thus right in his contention that posts of Assistant Librarian are to be filled 50% by promotion from Professional Assistant as per the University’s RRs, which continue to hold the field. In view of this position, Petitioner has established his right to be considered for promotion, his eligibility being beyond doubt.
22. At this stage, Ms. Arora submits that the unfilled vacancy has been filled in 2024 and in this context draws the attention of the Court to the additional affidavit filed. In my view, this should not come in the way of the Petitioner, who has been prosecuting his case diligently for the last six years and this is the third round of litigation. Petitioner was deprived of his consideration by the DPC convened on 14.06.2019, on a misreading of the 2018 Regulations, though he was eligible as per University’s RRs. Petitioner has acquired a vested right for consideration for promotion, which is a fundamental right and at this stage it will be unfair and unjust to non-suit the Petitioner from consideration only because University has filled the vacancy on an understanding which is wholly flawed.
23. Accordingly, this writ petition is allowed with a direction to Respondent No.2 to convene a DPC within a period of six weeks from today to consider the case of the Petitioner for promotion to the post of Assistant Librarian, subject to his conduct reports meeting the requisite criteria. Needless to state that if the Petitioner is recommended for promotion, he will be promoted with all consequential benefits, in accordance with law. It is for the University to take a decision with regard to the candidate appointed through direct recruitment and if necessary create a supernumerary post and continue him.
24. Pending application also stands disposed of.
JYOTI SINGH, J NOVEMBER 29, 2024 B.S. Rohella