/2022 INSC 0246/
  NON­REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
   CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).       2575        OF 2022
(Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 31892 of 2018)
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF 
TECHNOLOGY & ANOTHER ….APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
OM PRAKASH RAHI & OTHERS ….RESPONDENT(S)
WITH
    CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).      2576         OF 2022
     (Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 31890 of 2018)
    CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).       2577         OF 2022
     (Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 32025 of 2018)
    CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).       2578          OF 2022
     (Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 31445 of 2018)
    CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).       2579         OF 2022
     (Arising out of SLP(Civil) No(s). 31900 of 2018)
J U D G M E N T
Rastogi, J.
1. Leave granted.
1

2. The   present   batch   of   appeals   are   directed   against   the   self­
same judgment dated 31 st
 July, 2018 passed by the Division Bench
of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla which upheld the
order passed by the Director of the National Institute of Technology
without going through the process of selection of the teachers in the
higher   pay   band   of   Rs.   37400­67000   with   AGP   Rs.9000   and   re­
designated   as   Associate   Professor   consequent   upon   completion   of
three years of service in AGP Rs.8000(6 th
  Central Pay Commission)
and   directed   the   appellants   to   consider   their   claim   for   further
promotion   to   the   post   of   Professor,   and   if   found   suitable,   the
teacher  may  be promoted from the due date with all consequential
benefits.
3. The   facts   in   brief   have   been   taken   note   from   Civil   Appeal   @
SLP(Civil)   No.   31892   of   2018,   culled   out   from   the   record   and
relevant   for   the   purpose   are   that   the   appellant­institution,   was
initially   the   Regional   Engineering   College(REC)   (H.P.),   Hamirpur.
Consequent upon conversion of 14 NITs and 3 RECs including the
present institution at Hamirpur as National Institute of Technology
with deemed university status, they were taken over as fully funded
2

institutions   of   Central   Government   by   notification   dated   14 th
  May,
2003   wherein   it   was   decided   with   the   approval   of   the   competent
authority   to   implement   Career   Advancement   Scheme(CAS)   in   NITs
after   approval   of   the   recommendations   of   the   Selection   Committee
by   the   Board   of   Governors(BOGs)   of   the   NIT   concerned   by   Office
Memorandum   dated   15 th
  September,   2003   and   prescribed   service
conditions   of   the   teachers/employees   of   the   then   RECs   upon
conversion   as   NITs   with   deemed   university   status   by   later
notification dated 9 th
 November, 2003.
4. Later, Parliament enacted the National Institute of Technology
Act,   2007   w.e.f.   6 th
  June,   2007   wherein   the   appellant   institution
finds place in the first Schedule appended to the Act at Serial No. 5
in   the   list   of   central   institutions   incorporated   and   correspondingly
became   the   NIT,   Hamirpur   and   later   by   the   NIT   (Amendment)   Act,
2012 vide notification  dated 8 th
  June  2012, it  became the  National
Institute   of   Technology(Science,   Education   and   Research)   Act,
2007(hereinafter being referred to as the “Act 2007”). 
5. The respondent­teachers were initially appointed as a Lecturer
in   their   respective   Engineering   Department   in   the   then   REC,
3

Hamirpur(now   NIT   Hamirpur)   on   28 th
  June   2000.     Later,   on   the
recommendations   of   the   staff   selection   committee,   respondent
teachers were designated as Lecturers(Sr. Scale) in the pay scale of
Rs.10000­15200 with the approval of Board of Governors w.e.f. 25 th
July,   2005   vide   order   dated   30 th
  December,   2005   and   later
pursuant   to   the   recommendations   of   the   6 th
  Central   Pay
Commission  notified by  letter  dated 18 th
  August, 2009, respondent
teachers were placed as Assistant Professors in AGP Rs.6000 w.e.f.
1 st
  January,   2006   and   granted   AGP   Rs.7000   w.e.f.   1 st
  July,   2006
vide   pay   fixation   order   dated   20 th
  January   2010.     Further,   on   the
recommendations   of   the   selection   committee   in   terms   of   directives
of   Ministry   of   Human   Resource   Development   (hereinafter   being
referred to as the “MHRD”) dated 14 th
  March, 2012 and 18 th
  March
2013   and   with   due   approval   of   the   Board   of   Governors,   NIT,
Hamirpur,   they   were   fixed   in   the   AGP   Rs.8000   vide   orders   dated
25 th
  June, 2013 and 12 th
  November, 2013 respectively.   The orders
passed by the competent authority granting AGP of Rs.8000 are not
the subject matter of challenge.
4

6. It may be noticed that earlier, such of the Assistant Professors
and   Lecturers   (Selection   Grade)   who   had   completed   the   requisite
period   of   service   in   the   appropriate   pay   scale   with   the   approval   of
the competent authority, were re­designated as Associate Professor
in   the   pay   scale/pay   band   PB­4   (Rs.37400­67000)   with   AGP
Rs.9000   by   an   order   dated   22 nd
  June   2010   as   per   the   MHRD
guidelines dated 18 th
  August, 2009 and letter dated 31 st
  December,
2008. 
7. But   this   time,   the   Director   of   the   NIT,   on   its   own,   on   mere
completion  of  three years in  the  AGP Rs.8000, without  undergoing
the   process   of   selection   or   the   recommendations   being   made   with
the   approval   of   the   Board   of   Governors,   granted   benefit   of   AGP
Rs.9000   with   re­designation   as   Associate   Professor   to   all   the   six
respondent   teachers   and   one   of   the   orders   for   the   purpose   of
reference is reproduced hereunder:­
“NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
HAMIRPUR(H.P.)­177005
Office Order
Consequent upon the completion of 03 years of service in AGP
8000(6 th
  CPC) by Dr. O.P. Rahi on 24/07/2013, he is hereby placed
in   the   higher   pay   band   of   Rs.   37400­67000   with   AGP   9000   and
5

designated   as   Associate   Professor   w.e.f.   25/07/2013   in   term   with
para 2 (a)(x) of Govt. of India, Ministry of HRD, New Delhi letter No.
1­32/2006­U.I(i) dated 31 st
 December 2008.
The above incumbent will be entitled to draw the basic pay of
12400+AGP 9000 w.e.f. 19/10/2013 subject to verification by audit
and   subsequent   direction,   if   any,   received   from   MHRD   in   this
regard.
By Order
DIRECTOR
NIT HAMIRPUR(HP)
Dt 27/10/14
NIT/HMR/Admn/Rev­270(Vol­18)/2014/6435­47
Copy to:
1.Above named officer through HOD, MED
2.Dy. Registrar(Accounts), NIT Hamirpur(HP)
3.PF of the individual
REGISTRAR
       NIT HAMIRPUR(HP)”
8. Since   it   was   not   approved   by   MHRD   as   it   was   held   to   be   in
contravention   to   the   guidelines   dated   14 th
  March,   2012   and   18 th
March   2013,   that   became   the   cause   of   grievance   to   approach   the
High   Court   by   filing   the   writ   petitions   under   Article   226   of   the
Constitution.  
9. The   High   Court,   under   the   impugned   judgment,   held   that
MHRD was not the authority competent to issue guidelines after the
Act,   2007   came   into  force   and   since   the   statute,   for   the   first   time,
6

was   incorporated/enacted   in   2017,   laying   down   the   recruitment
rules   relating   to   the   promotion   of   teachers   in   NIT   having   been
incorporated by an amendment to the statute by clause 23(5)(a) on
21 st
  July, 2017 whereby schedule ‘E’ has been appended providing
qualifications and  other  terms and conditions for  academic staff of
NITs which may be applicable prospectively and accordingly upheld
their   placement   in   the   higher   pay   band   of   Rs.   37400­67000   with
AGP Rs.9000 and their re­designation as Associate Professor with a
further   direction   for   their   consideration   to   the   post   of   Professor   in
accordance   with   the   guidelines   which   have   now   been   enforced   in
the year 2017.
10. Learned   counsel   for   the   appellants   submits   that   MHRD
guidelines dated 31 st
 December, 2008 on which the High Court has
heavily  relied upon are not applicable to the NIT.   To the contrary,
after the Act, 2007 came into force, the first statute in exercise of its
power   under   Section   26(1)   of   the   Act   was   notified   on   23 rd
  April,
2009 which did not  contain  any  provision for  Career  Advancement
Scheme  and it  has  been  introduced by  the  MHRD  to  deal  with  the
genuine stagnation and hardship faced by the teachers and to meet
7

such exigency, higher pay grade or re­designation will be on ‘in­situ’
basis and, therefore, the work allocation remains the same and that
is   the   reason   for   which   each   of   the   respondent   teachers   was
appointed   in   the   AGP   Rs.8000   by   an   order   dated   25 th
  June,   2013
and   12 th
  November,   2013   in   terms   of   the   guidelines   dated   14 th
March,   2012   read   with   18 th
  March,   2013   based   on   the
recommendations   made   by   the   duly   constituted   committee.   In   the
given   facts   and   circumstances,   the   High   Court   has   committed   the
manifest   error   in   relying   upon   the   guidelines   of   MHRD   dated   31 st
December   2008,   which   is   not   applicable   to   NIT   teachers,   in
consequence,   the   finding   which   has   been   recorded   by   the   High
Court in upholding the orders passed by the Director granting AGP
Rs.9000   merely   on   completion   of   three   years’   service   and   their   re­
designation   as   Associate   Professor   being,   per   se,   illegal   is   not
sustainable in law.
11. Learned counsel further submits that while granting benefit of
AGP   Rs.9000   and   their   re­designation   as   Associate   Professor,   the
Director is not the authority competent in terms of the provisions of
the Act 2007, at the same time, AGP Rs.9000 and re­designation as
8

Associate   Professor   was   made   subject   to   verification   and
subsequent direction of MHRD in this regard, hence no right could
be said to be vested in favour of the respondent teachers and that is
the reason, the matter, at one stage, was sent to the committee and
since   the   committee   also   raised   certain   objections,   matter   was
referred   to   MHRD   for   seeking   clarification   and   MHRD   recorded   its
finding that since the appointments have not been made in terms of
the guidelines dated 14 th
  March, 2012 followed by 18 th
  March 2013
and the appointments made by the Director not being approved, no
error was committed in the procedure been followed to withdraw the
benefits extended to the respondent teachers. 
12. Learned   counsel   further   submits   that   this   fact   has   been
completely   overlooked   by   the   High   Court   that   the   appointments
were   made   in   the   AGP   Rs.8000,   after   the   recommendations   made
by   the   selection   committee   been   approved   by   the   Board   of
Governors,   in   terms   of   the   guidelines   dated   14 th
  March,   2012
followed   by   18 th
  March   2013   that   indeed   includes   further
appointments   to   AGP   Rs.9000   and   re­designation   as   Associate
Professor   and   thus,   the   finding   which   has   been   recorded   relying
9

upon   the   MHRD   circular   dated   31 st
  December,   2008   in   upholding
the   order   of   AGP   Rs.9000   and   re­designation   to   the   post   of
Associate Professor is not sustainable in law.
13. Learned counsel further submits that after the Act, 2007 came
into   force,   the   first   statute   was   notified   in   exercise   of   its   power
under  sub­section (1) of Section 26 of the Act, 2007 with the prior
approval of the visitor of NITs by notification dated 23 rd
 April, 2009.
Clause 23 of  the  statute 2009 provides  for   making   appointment  to
the   post   of   teachers   by   direct   recruitment/promotion   pursuant   to
the   constitution   of   selection   committee.     Although,   the   notification
and   other   terms   and   conditions   of   appointment   could   not   be   laid
down by that time and it was notified in the year 2017, thus, in the
given   circumstances,   by   virtue   of   Section   5(d)   of   the   Act   2007,
laying   down   the   conditions   of   eligibility   for   appointment,   the
guidelines   issued   by   the   MHRD     have   a   binding   force   and   the
finding   recorded   by   the   High   Court   holding   that   MHRD   is   not   an
authority   competent   to   issue   guidelines   after   the   Act,   2007   came
into   force,   is   not   sustainable   particularly,   in   the   given
circumstances   when   the   respondent   teachers   got   AGP   Rs.8000
10

pursuant   to   the   very   guidelines   of   MHRD   dated   14 th
  March,   2012
followed with 18 th
 March, 2013.
14. Thus, the respondent teachers, at least could not be permitted
to   approbate   and   reprobate,   at   the   same   time,   while   availing   the
AGP   Rs.8000   under   the   MHRD   guidelines   dated   14 th
  March,   2012
followed   with   18 th
  March,   2013,   it   is   not   open   to   canvass   that   the
very   guidelines   will   not   apply   for   further   AGP   Rs.9000   and   re­
designation   as   Associate   Professor   and   this   has   been   completely
overlooked by the High Court while passing the impugned judgment
and needs to be interfered with by this Court.
15. Per   contra,   learned   counsel   for   the   respondents,   while
supporting   the   impugned   judgment,   submits   that   once   their   merit
has   been   assessed   by   the   committee   and   each   of   them   has   gone
through   the   process   of   selection   and   interview   under   the   Career
Advancement Scheme as per  the norms fixed for  Centrally  Funded
Technical   Institutions   and   corresponding   AGP   Rs.8000   has   been
granted   to   them   by   orders   dated   25 th
  June,   2013   and   12 th
November, 2013 respectively, each of them became entitled for AGP
Rs.9000 and for re­designation to the post of Associate Professor on
11

completion   of   three   years’   service   in   the   grade   of   Assistant
Professors/   Lecturers(Sel.   Grade)   in   terms   of   MHRD   Guidelines
dated   31 st
  December,   2008   and   para   2(x)   in   particular,   and   the
Director,   being   the   competent   authority   at   the   given   point   of   time,
and   each   of   them   had   indisputedly   completed   three   years’   in   the
AGP   Rs.8000   was   entitled   for   the   higher   pay   band   of   Rs.   37400­
67000   with   AGP   Rs.9000   and   consequent   re­designation   as
Associate Professor and this what the High Court has upheld in the
impugned   judgment   and   the   finding   being   in   conformity   with   the
MHRD   guidelines   dated   31 st
  December   2008,   needs   no   further
interference by this Court.
16. Learned   counsel   further   submits   that,   for   the   first   time,
through an amendment to the statute under clause 23(5)(a) on 21 st
July, 2017, schedule ‘E’ had been appended providing qualifications
and other terms and conditions for academic staff of NITs, thus, all
actions   prior   thereto   are   to   be   governed   in   terms   of   the   guidelines
issued by the MHRD applicable at the given point of time, they are
entitled to protect their re­designation of Associate Professor which
they are enjoying for sufficient long time and became due for further
12

promotion to the post of Professor under the guidelines which have
been   introduced   by   an   amendment   to   the   statute   by   notification
dated 21 st
  July  2017, at least at this point of time, this Court may
protect not only their service conditions but the appellants may be
directed to further consider their promotion to the post of Professor
in terms of the amended statute dated 21 st
 July 2017.
17. We  have  heard   learned   counsel   for   the   parties   and  with   their
assistance perused the material available on record.
18. That   prior   to   the   appellant   institution   became   NIT,   it   was   a
REC and at that time, the guidelines for CAS were prescribed by the
All India Council of Technical Education(AICTE).  Consequent upon
conversion   into   NIT   with   deemed   status   and   taken   over   as   fully
funded   institution   under   the   Central   Government   vide   notification
dated 14 th
  May 2003, specific guidelines were formulated by MHRD
for CAS for faculty members of NITs wherein it was decided with the
approval   of   the   competent   authority   to   implement   Career
Advancement Scheme(CAS) in NITs for which the composition of the
Selection   Committee   had   been   revised   and   after   approval   of   the
recommendations   of   the   Selection   Committee   by   the   Board   of
13

Governors(BOGs)   of   the   NIT   concerned   by   Office   Memorandum
dated 15 th
 September 2003, prescribed the service conditions of the
employees of the then RECs upon conversion as NITs with deemed
university status by later notification dated 9 th
 November 2003.
19. At   this   point   of   time,   it   will   be   appropriate   to   clarify   that
MHRD, on the recommendations of the 6 th
 Central Pay Commission,
introduced schemes for revision of pay structure and re­designation
of   teachers   and   equivalent   cadres   in   universities   and   colleges
following   the   revision   of   pay   scales   of   Central   Government
employees   vide   its   directive   dated   31 st
  December,   2008   but   that   is
not   applicable   to   the   NITs   and   for   NITs,   separate   directives   were
issued   by   the   MHRD   on   18 th
  August,   2009   addressed   to   all
Centrally Funded Technical Institutions and also to the IITs and the
scheme provides for revision of pay structure and re­designation of
teachers   under   6 th
  Central   Pay   Commission   to   grant   accelerated
promotional benefits of the scheme under para (2), which laid down
the   conditions   of   eligibility   for   revision   to   AGP   Rs.6000   to   AGP
Rs.7000;   AGP   Rs.7000   to   AGP   Rs.8000   and   AGP   Rs.8000   to   AGP
Rs.9000 and also re­designation as Associate Professor.  The extract
14

of   MHRD   guidelines   dated   18 th
  August,   2009   relevant   for   the
purpose is reproduced as under:­ 
F. No. F.23—1/ 2008­TS.11
Government of India
Ministry of Human Resource Development
       Department of Higher Education
Technical Section­11
Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi
Dated, the 18 th
 August, 2009
To
The Director
All Centrally Funded Technical Institutions
Subject:   Revision   of   pay   of   teaching   and   other   Staff   in
Centrally Funded Technical Institutions (CFTIs) following the
pay   revision   of   the   Central   Government   employees   on   the
recommendation   of   the   6 th
  Central   Pay   Commission   (6 th
CPC).
Sir,
I   am   directed   to   say   that   the   Government   of   India   have
decided,   after   taking   into   consideration   the   recommendations
made   by   the   Govardhan   Mehta   Committee,   to   revise   the   pay   of
teaching and other staff of Centrally Funded Technical Institutions
following the pay revision of the Central Government employees on
the recommendation of 6 th
 CPC.  The revised pay and other service
conditions   as   approved   by   the   Government   of   India   for   the
teaching and other staff in CFTIs are as under:­
1…
2.For Other Centrally Funded Technical Institutions
The   pay   structure   and   designations   for   all   other
Centrally   Funded   Technical   Institutions   will   generally   be   the
same as per the scheme of revision of pay of teachers,  etc. in
15

Universities, etc. as notified by the Ministry of HRD vide letter
No.   1­32/2006­U.II/UI(i)   dated   31 st
  December,   2008   and
clarification   issued   thereon   from   time   to   time.     However,   in
the   case   of   National   Institutes   of   Technology(NITs),   Indian
School   of   Mines   University(ISMU),   Indian   Institutes   of
Information   Technology(IIITs)   and   Schools   of   Planning   &
Architecture(SPAs),   the   following   accelerated   promotional
benefits will be given while maintaining the UGC pay structure
and designations ;
(a) Seven   non­compounded   advance   increments   shall   be
admissible   at   the   entry   level   of   recruitment   as   Assistant
Professor   to  persons   possessing   the  degree   of  Ph.D  awarded   in
the relevant discipline.
(b) (i)An   Assistant   Professor   possessing   the   degree   of   Ph.D   in   the
relevant discipline and with regular service of 3 years’ at AGP of
Rs. 6000/p.m. shall be eligible for moving to AGP of Rs. 7000/­
p.m.
(ii) An Assistant Professor  possessing  the degree of Ph.D in the
relevant discipline and with regular service of 3 years’ at AGP of
Rs.   7000/­   p.m.   shall   be   eligible   for   moving   to   AGP   of   Rs.
8000/­ p.m.
(iii)   An Assistant Professor possessing the degree of Ph.D in
the   relevant   discipline   and   with   regular   service   of   3   years’
at   AGP   of   Rs.   8000/­   p.m.   shall   be   eligible   for   moving   to
AGP   of   Rs.9000/­   p.m.   and   re­designated   as   Associate
Professor.
(c) Associate Professor completing 4 years’ of regular service in the
AGP of Rs. 9000/­ and possessing a Ph.D degree in the relevant
discipline   shall   be   eligible   to   be   appointed   and   designated   as
Professor,   subject  to  other   conditions   of  academic   performance
as   laid   down   by   the   UGC   and   by   the   university,   if   any.     No
teacher   other   than   those   with   a   Ph.D   shall   be   promoted,
appointed   or   designated   as   Professor.     The   Pay   Band   for   the
post   of   Professors   shall   be   Rs.   37400­67000   with   AGP   of
Rs.10000/­ p.m.
(d) Up   to   a   maximum   of   20%   of   the   sanctioned   post   of   Porfessors
shall   be   placed   in   PB­4   in   the   AGP   of   Rs.12000/­   p.m.   after
16

regular   service   of   6   years’   as   Professor   in   the   AGP   of   Rs.
10000/­ and the minimum pay in the Pay Band will be fixed at
Rs.   48000/­   p.m.     Other   eligibility   conditions   will   be   as   laid
down by the UGC.
(e) All   promotions   will   be   based   on   performance   evaluation   and
subject   to   fulfilment   of   other   conditions   laid   down   by   MHRD
letter No. 1­32/2006­U.II/U.I(i) dated 31 st
 December, 2008.
….”
20. To  overcome   the   difficulties   being  faced   on  implementation   of
the   revision   of   pay   structure   of   teachers   in   Centrally   Funded
Technical Institutions dated 18 th
 August 2009, necessary guidelines
were   issued   by   the   MHRD   dated   14 th
  March,   2012   in   which   a
clarification   was   made   that   the   guidelines   provided   by   AICTE   and
UGC are not applicable to NITs with a further specification that CAS
in   NITs   will   be   governed   by   guidelines   and   regulations   defined   by
MHRD   and   the   council   for   NITs.     The   extract   of   the   guidelines
issued by MHRD dated 14 th
 March, 2012 is reproduced below:­
“No. F.33—7/ 2011­TS.III
Government of India
Ministry of Human Resource Development
Department of Higher Education
Shastri Bhawan, New Delhi
Dated, the 14 th
 March, 2012
To
The Directors
17

Of all the National Institutes of Technology(NITs)
Subject:   Promotion   of   faculty   members   of   NITs   under   the
Career   Advancement   Scheme   (CAS)­   Issue   of   necessary
guidelines thereof­regarding.
Sir/Madam,
I am directed to refer to the various communications issued
by  this Ministry on the rules and regulations for promotion under
Career   Advancement   Scheme   (CAS)   for   faculty   members   of   the
National Institutes of Technology (NITs).  The Ministry has received
a number of representations from the faculty members of the NITs
on the implementation of CAS.  The issue had also been discussed
in   meetings   of   the   Board   of   Governors   (BOGs)   of   NITs,   wherein
concerns have been expressed.
2. In   order   to   resolve   the   issue,   a   Committee   (under   the
Chairmanship   of   Prof.   Sunil   Kr.   Sarangi,   Director,   NIT­Rourkela)
was   constituted   for   removal   of   pay   anomalies.     The   report
submitted by this Committee was examined in the Ministry.  It was
felt   that   instant   issue   was   intricately   linked   with   the   Recruitment
Rules for faculty posts.
3. In   order   to   approach   the   instant   issue   from   a   holistic
prospective and in the back­drop of a need for Recruitment Rules,
it   was   considered   necessary   to   examine   these   two   issues   afresh.
Accordingly,   a   Special   Committee   was   set   up   under   the
Chairmanship   of   Prof.   Sarangi,   Director,   NIT­Rourkela   vide   this
Ministry’s   Order   F.No.   24­1/2010­TS.III   dated   27.07.2011   and
23.08.2011.   The Sarangi Committee after  detailed examination of
the aforesaid issues submitted its report to Standing Committee of
the   Council   of   NITs   in   its   meeting   held   on   15.11.2011   under   the
Chairmanship of Dr. RA Mashelkar.   The Council of NITs in its 3 rd
meeting   held   on   18.11.2011   resolved   to   accept   the
recommendations  of  the  Sarangi Committee  for  implementation  of
CAS   &   Recruitment   Rules   of   faculty   in   NITs,   as   modified   by   the
Standing Committee.
4. Subsequent   to   the   resolution   of   the   NIT   Council,
representations   have   been   received   in   the   Ministry   from   several
NITs   regarding   the   decisions   taken   for   removal   of   anomalies,
faculty   promotions,   condition   of   service,   etc.     These
representations   have   since   been   examined   in   the   Ministry   in
18

consultation with certain Chairpersons of the BOGs and Directors
of NITs.   After due deliberations, the following general and specific
guidelines are prescribed:
(a) career   Advancement   Scheme(CAS)   is   an   integral   part   of   a
rigid staff structure where the number of posts at any given level is
limited.     Such   a   scheme   provides   an   avenue   through   which   a
qualified  employee   climbs   to  the  higher   rung   of   the   career   ladder,
even if there is no vacancy.  It, however, will not be treated as mere
formality   as   the   purpose   of   the   scheme   was   for   development   of
merit and not eligibility based promotions.
(b) For a faculty member to gain advancement under CAS, he or
she must satisfy the approved criteria under three broad heads: (i)
a critical number of years in the lower level or designation and/or
AGP,   (ii)   cumulative   academic   performance   during   the   service
period   at   the   current   level   in   terms   of   teaching   and   research
output   as   well   as   sharing   institutional   responsibility,   and   (iii)
proficiency   and   knowledge   in   one’s   chosen   field   of   research   and
teaching Superior record in all these three fronts qualifies a faculty
member for advancement to a higher level.
(c ) CAS   has   been   in   operation   in   institutions   under
guidelines   provided   by   AICTE   and   UGC.     It   is   clarified   that
those   norms   and   procedures   are   not   applicable   to   NITs.     CAS
in NITs will be governed by guidelines and regulations defined
by the Ministry of HRD and the Council of NITs.
(d)..
(e)..
(f) All   recommendations   of   the   Selection   Committee   shall   take
effect   only   from   the   date   of   approval   of   the   recommendations   by
the  Board  or   any   later  date  as decided  by   the Board.    There  shall
be   no   retrospective   implementation   of   recommendations   in   any
case (either financial or notional).
(g) The   constitution   of   the   Selection   Committee,   the   procedure
and   criteria   of   selection   shall   be   same   for   internal   and   external
candidates.     There   shall  not   be  a   separate  or   special  interview  for
CAS   selection;   interviews   should   be   conducted   along   with
candidates for direct recruitment against vacancies, if any.
19

(h)..
(i)…
(j)…
(k) Any   promotion   or   enhancement   of   Pay   Band   or   Grade
Pay,   already   implemented   by   the   institute   should   be   got
reviewed/examined   by   the   Board   by   a   duly   constituted
selection   committee   immediately.     Any   increment   paid   over
the   beginning   of   the   scale   of   Associate   Professor   to   those
Assistant   Professors   who   did   not   complete   3   years,   is   to   be
recovered from future pay.
(l) The   orders   issued   by   the   Ministry   following   the   6 th
Central   Pay   Commission   provides   minimum   number   of   years
of   service   to   go   to   higher   AGP   or   a   higher   designation,   e.g.   3
years   from   AGP   Rs.   6000/­   to   Rs.   7000/­   or   from   AGP   Rs.
7,000/­ to AGP Rs. 8,000/­ etc.   These are to be implemented
only through the formal selection process.   A formal Selection
Committee (as per the NIT Act, 2007 and the statutes of NITs)
must   examine   the   candidature   and   ensure   that   an
enhancement   is   recommended   on   the   strength   of   academic
contribution expected of a faculty member of an institution of
National Importance.
(m)…
(n) The  eligibility  criteria(number   of  years  in  lower  AGP) should
be   seen   as   necessary   but   not   sufficient   condition   for   upgradation
of   AGP   or   change   of   designation.     Any   upgradation   can   be   done
only   on   recommendation   of   a   duly   constituted   Selections
Committee   after   formal   interview.     The   process   for   AGP
upgradation should be as serious and dignified as that for change
of   designation.     A   candidate   must   convince   the   Selection
Committee that he or she engaged in scholastic pursuits (teaching,
research and management) to deserve an upgradation after his/her
last advancement.
(o)…
(p)…
20

(q) All   Institutes   shall   strive   to   conduct   annual   selection
processes   regularly   in   case   of   Institutes   that   have   not   conducted
CAS interviews for 3 years or more.  Selection Committees may, as
a   onetime   measure,   examine   scholastic   contribution   of   internal
candidates   made   after   the   last   interview   and   recommend   a   salary
and   AGP   they   would   have   earned   now,   had   the   Selection
Committee met at the appropriate time.
(r )…
(s)….” (emphasis supplied)
21. It   will   be   relevant   to   note   that   eligibility   has   been   prescribed
under   the   relevant   directives   issued   by   MHRD   dated   18 th
  August,
2009   followed   by   14 th
  March,   2012   with   a   clear   stipulation   that
financial upgradation in terms of 6 th
  Central Pay Commission shall
be   extended   co­terminus   to   the   teacher,   after   going   through   the
formal  selection   process,  in   terms  of   the   formation   of  the   selection
committee provided under the Act, 2007 and the statutes of NITs to
examine   the   candidature   and   ensure   overall   suitability   of   the
teacher   on   fulfilment   of   the   relevant   conditions   for   grant   of
upgradation of pay/higher AGP/redesignation, as the case may be.
22. It   is   not   disputed   that   each   of   the   respondent   teachers   was
granted   financial   benefit   of   the   AGP   Rs.8000   in   terms   of   MHRD
guidelines   dated   14 th
  March,   2012   followed   by   18 th
  March,   2013
based   on   the   recommendations   of   the   selection   committee
21

constituted   followed   with   interview   and   approval   of   Board   of
Governors to the post of Lecturer(Selection Grade) vide Office order
dated 25 th
  June, 2013 and 12 th
  November, 2013 in the pay scale of
Rs. 12000­18300(corresponding  to  AGP Rs.8000 in  6 th
  Central Pay
Commission).
23. But while placing in the higher pay band of Rs. 37400­67000
with   AGP   Rs.9000   and   re­designation   as   Associate   Professor,   no
procedure   was   followed,   neither   selection   committee   was
constituted  nor   their   suitability   was  adjudged  and   also  there   is   no
approval of the Board of Governors which is the requirement of law
under the Act 2007.
24. The   Director   who   is   not   even   the   authority   competent   under
the provisions of the Act, 2007 straightaway, on its own discretion,
without following the procedure prescribed by law, passed orders in
favour   of   each   of   the   respondent   teachers   on   mere   completion   of
three   years’   service   in   the   AGP   Rs.8000   and   placed   them   in   the
higher   pay   band   of   Rs.37400­67000   with   AGP   Rs.9000   and   re­
designation   of   Associate   Professor.     One   of   the   specimens   (copy   of
the   order   passed   by   the   Director),   has   been   reproduced
22

hereinabove,   which   in   itself,   depicts   that   the   Director,   who   is   not
the authority competent under the Act, 2007 passed orders without
due   compliance   of   the   procedure   prescribed   under   the   Office
Memorandum dated 14 th
  March, 2012 and that was the reason for
which   MHRD   declined   to   approve   such   appointments   by   its
communication dated 12 th
 February 2018.
25. The statute was later enacted vide notification dated 23 rd
 April,
2009   in   exercise   of   powers   under   sub­section   (1)   of   Section   26   of
the   Act   2007.   Under   Section   13(1)(d),  the  Board  is  the   appointing
authority for the academic staff in the post of Lecturer or above.  At
the  same time, the Central Government,  with the  prior  approval  of
the visitor, in exercise of power under sub­section (1) of Section 26
of the Act 2007, framed the first statute for NITs and Director, as an
Officer of the Institute, has been empowered under clause 17 of the
statute to employ teaching  supporting staff and discharge all other
administrative functions delegated by the authority.
26. Indisputedly,   under   the   present   scheme   of   the   Act   2007,   the
first statute came to be introduced by  notification dated 23 rd
  April,
2009   followed   by   later   amendments   made   vide   notification   dated
23

21 st
  July,   2017.     The   power   for   appointment   of   teacher   is   vested
only   with   the   Board   of   Governors   obviously   on   the
recommendations made by the selection committee.   In the present
scheme   of   the   Act,   2007   of   which   a   reference   has   been   made,   the
orders passed by the Director of placing the higher pay band of Rs.
37400­67000   with   AGP   Rs.9000   and   re­designated   as   Associate
Professor to each of the respondent teachers cannot be said to be in
accordance   with   the   procedure   prescribed   for   CAS   in   terms   of   the
guidelines issued by MHRD dated 14 th
 March, 2012 and 18 th
 March,
2013 having not been followed by the Officer of the institution, i.e.
Director,   in   passing   orders   which   were   impugned   before   the   High
Court that indeed cannot be approved by this Court.
27. The   Division   Bench   of   the   High   Court   has   proceeded   on   the
premise that after the Act, 2007 has come into force, MHRD is not
competent   to   issue   circulars/guidelines   of   which   a   reference   has
been made dated 14 th
  March, 2012 and 18 th
  March 2013, which is
completely   misplaced   for   the   reason   that   after   the   Act,   2007   came
into   force,   the   appellant­institution   was   taken   over   by   the   Central
Government   and   being   fully   funded   institution   by   the   Central
24

Government, the CAS was introduced by MHRD only for accelerated
promotion   and   was   not   in   contradistinction   to   the   scheme   for
appointment   available   to   the   teachers   under   the   provisions   of   the
Act 2007.   At the same time, the respondent teachers were granted
the benefit of AGP Rs.8000 under the same guidelines issued by the
MHRD   dated   14 th
  March,   2012   and   18 th
  March,   2013   that   too   on
the   recommendations   of   the   selection   committee   and   with   the
approval   of   the   Board   of   Governors   of   NIT,   Hamirpur,   in   the   given
facts   and   circumstances,   to   hold   that   the   benefits   once   availed
under the guidelines dated 14 th
  March, 2012 and 18 th
  March, 2013
by the respondent teachers while seeking revision of AGP Rs.8000,
the   very   scheme   will   not   be   applicable   while   considering   for   AGP
Rs.9000   and   for   re­designation   as   Associate   Professor   is   otherwise
not sustainable in law.
28. The   Division   Bench   has   further   committed   an   error   in
recording   a   finding   that   since   the   statute   pursuant   to   which   the
eligibility   conditions   for   appointment   have   been   introduced   by
notification   dated   21 st
  July,   2017   is   prospective   in   character   and
earlier   appointments   made   thereto   have   to   be   in   terms   of   the
25

guidelines   issued   by   MHRD   dated   31 st
  December   2008   for   the
reason   that   the   guidelines   issued   by   the   MHRD   dated   31 st
December, 2008 are not applicable so far as the NITs are concerned
and this fact was clarified by the MHRD in its later guidelines dated
18 th
  August,   2009   followed   by   14 th
  March,   2012   and   this   fact   has
been   completely   overlooked   by   the   Division   Bench   while   placing
reliance on the guidelines dated 31 st
 December, 2008.
29. We   would   like   to   observe   that   the   guidelines   issued   by   the
MHRD   from   time   to   time   for   revision   of   pay   structure   and   re­
designation   of   the   teachers   in   NITs   are   in   the   form   of   accelerated
promotions,   remain   co­terminus   with   the   person   and   are   not
related   to   post   based   promotions   under   the   relevant   recruitment
rules,   however,   such   scheme   is   not   available   under   the   Act,   2007
and   after   the   amendment   notification   dated   21 st
  July,   2017,
Schedule   ‘E’   has   been   appended   in   exercise   of   power   under   the
clause   23(5)(a)   of   the   statute   laying   down   the   qualifications   and
other   terms  and   conditions   of   appointment   of   academic   staff  to   be
made   through   open   advertisement   on   the   recommendations   of   the
26

selection   committee   until   exempted   under   the   scheme   of   these
rules.
30. To   clarify   it   further,   CAS   scheme   by   its   very   nomenclature
called   Career   Advancement   Scheme   introduced   for   teachers   like
Assured   Career   Progression   Scheme   (ACP),   later   called   MACP   for
Central   Government   employees   to   overcome   the   problem   of
stagnation   and   hardship   faced   due   to   lack   of   adequate   promotion
avenues,   it   nowhere   tinker   with   the   conditions   of   eligibility   for
appointment to the cadre posts included in schedule ‘E’ annexed to
the   statute   pursuant   to   which   qualifications   and   other   terms   and
conditions   of   appointment   of   academic   staff   are   included   vide
notification dated 21 st
 July 2017.
31. Before   parting   with   the   judgment,   we   would   like   to   observe
that since the respondent teachers are working in the AGP Rs.9000
pursuant to the orders though may not be legally sustainable but it
is   not   the   case   of   the   appellants   that   they   are   not   eligible   for   AGP
Rs.9000 and for re­designation as Associate Professor.  In the given
facts and circumstances, we consider it appropriate to observe that
let the respondent teachers may continue for the time being and the
27

appellants   may   initiate   the   process   to   consider   the   respondent
teachers   for   pay   band   of   Rs.   37400­67000   with   AGP   Rs.9000   and
for  re­designation as Associate Professor in terms of the guidelines
dated   14 th
  March,   2012   and   18 th
  March   2013.     Such   exercise   may
be undertaken within a period of four months and further course of
action   may   be   taken   in   terms   of   the   recommendations   of   the
selection   committee   and   if   they   are   found   suitable,   benefits   be
granted from the date of their suitability being adjudged and any of
the respondent teachers, if aggrieved by the recommendations made
by   the  selection  committee/approval  by  the   BOG,  will  be  at  liberty
to avail such remedy which the law permits.
32. The appeals accordingly succeed and are hereby allowed with
the   above   observations   and   the   judgment   passed   by   the   Division
Bench dated 31 st
 July, 2018 is hereby set aside.  No costs.
33. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
        ………………………J.
 (AJAY RASTOGI)
………………………J.
28

 (ABHAY S. OKA)
NEW DELHI
MARCH 30, 2022
29