Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court of India allowed the appeals filed by Allahabad University and its affiliated colleges against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court. The dispute arose from the shortlisting process for Assistant Professor posts in Sanskrit, where the respondent, Geetanjali Tiwari (Pandey), was not shortlisted because her past teaching experience as a contractual faculty and guest lecturer was not counted under clause 7 of Table 3A of the UGC 2018 Regulations. The High Court had held that Regulation 10 of the UGC Regulations, which conditions the counting of past services, does not apply to direct recruitment for Assistant Professor posts, and declared Regulation 10(f)(iii) ultra vires Article 14. The Supreme Court reversed this decision, holding that Regulation 10 must be read together with Table 3A to determine what constitutes 'teaching experience' for shortlisting. The Court reasoned that Regulation 10 provides the necessary conditions for counting past services, including the requirement that contractual faculty must have drawn emoluments not less than the monthly gross salary of a regularly appointed Assistant Professor. Since the respondent did not meet this condition, her experience was rightly excluded. The Supreme Court also upheld the validity of Regulation 10(f)(iii), finding it reasonable and not arbitrary. Consequently, the appeals were allowed, the High Court's judgment was set aside, and the writ petitions filed by the respondent were dismissed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - UGC Regulations - Interpretation - Applicability of Regulation 10 - The core issue was whether Regulation 10 of the UGC 2018 Regulations, which prescribes conditions for counting past services, applies to shortlisting for Assistant Professor posts under Table 3A. The High Court held Regulation 10 inapplicable, but the Supreme Court reversed, holding that Regulation 10 must be read harmoniously with Table 3A to give effect to the scheme. (Paras 1-34) B) Constitutional Law - Article 14 - Ultra Vires Challenge - The High Court had declared Regulation 10(f)(iii) ultra vires Article 14, but the Supreme Court set aside this declaration, holding that the regulation is reasonable and not arbitrary. (Paras 35-40) C) Service Law - Teaching Experience - Guest Lecturer and Contractual Faculty - The Supreme Court held that past teaching experience as a guest lecturer or on contractual basis does not automatically qualify as 'teaching experience' under clause 7 of Table 3A unless it meets the conditions in Regulation 10(e) and (f)(iii). (Paras 2-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether Regulation 10(f)(iii) of the UGC 2018 Regulations is applicable while awarding marks for teaching/post-doctoral experience under clause 7 of Table 3A for shortlisting candidates for the post of Assistant Professor, and whether Regulation 10(f)(iii) is ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, set aside the High Court's judgment, and dismissed the writ petitions filed by the respondent. The Court held that Regulation 10 is applicable for awarding marks under clause 7 of Table 3A, and that Regulation 10(f)(iii) is not ultra vires Article 14.
Law Points
- Interpretation of UGC Regulations
- Teaching Experience
- Shortlisting Criteria
- Direct Recruitment
- Regulation 10 applicability
