Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi And Anr vs V. Jeganathan Arulmoni

,,

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J",,

The Govt. of NCT of Delhi, in this writ petition, challenges an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereafter “CATâ€), which declared",,

and directed that the respondent (hereafter “Arulmoniâ€) had to be treated as holding a post equivalent to a Lecturer and was therefore entitled to,,

a higher age of retirement.,,

The facts necessary to decide this case are that Arulmoni joined the Delhi College of Engineering (“DCEâ€) when it was directly administered,,

by the Govt. of NCT. He was appointed as a Foreman Instructor on the recommendations of UPSC by office letter dated 17.02.1994. He holds a,,

doctorate (Ph.D.) as he is a postgraduate in engineering. Upon the enactment of the Delhi Technological University Act pursuant to its provisions,",,

Arulmoni’s services were placed at the disposal of the University (hereafter “DTUâ€) where he continued to work. By a letter dated,,

10.03.2005, the Government of NCT of Delhi recommended to the Principal Secretary (TTE), Directorate of Training and Technical Education, Govt.",,

of NCT of Delhi that Foremen Instructors, including Arulmoni had been teaching at UG level and were conducting workshop classes and laboratories",,

and that the posts of Foreman Instructor were created as follow up of Madan Committee report with the purpose to strengthen the workshop teaching,,

and practice in Colleges of Engineering & Technology. In terms of recommendations of the Madan Committee, Foreman Instructors had been kept at",,

the level of lecturers and they also assume the responsibility for teaching workshop technology. It was felt that therefore, they are entitled to career",,

advancement Scheme and other benefits available to teachers as per AICTE pay structure.Â,,

The request was acceded to by the Government of NCT of Delhi and approval of the competent authority was conveyed for grant of career,,

advancement Scheme benefits to the Foreman Instructors of Delhi College of Engineering at par with lecturers, through letter dated 23.08.2006. This",,

was followed up and an order was issued on 13.04.2007 granting senior scale and selection grade to Foreman Instructors, including Arulmoni (at par",,

with Lecturers). Later the Board of Management of Delhi Technological University (erstwhile DCE) in its second meeting approved the categorical,,

proposal that the four posts of Foreman Instructor (Mechanical Engineering/Production Engineering Department) should be re-designated as Lecturer,,

in Mechanical/Production Engineering.,,

Implementation of this decision was through an order by the Delhi Technological University Office Order dated 15.12.2009, which reads as:",,

“Sub:- Re-designation of Foreman Instructor as lecturer.,,

The Competent Authority is pleased to re-designate 4 post of Foreman Instructor as lecturer in the mechanical/Production Engg. Deptt. with,,

immediate effect. The terms & conditions of service remain the same.,,

No extra remuneration/scale shall be paid by the DTU.,,

This issues with the approval of BOM in the second meeting held on 21.11.2009.â€​,,

By an Office Order dated 29.07.2010, the Government of NCT of Delhi (DTTE) issued an order enhancing the age of superannuation for teachers",,

in degree level technical institutions from 62 to 65 years i.e. for those involved in classroom teaching in order to attract eligible people to the teaching,,

career and to retain teachers in service for a longer period. Para 7 of the order reads as follows:,,

“7. AGE OF SUPERANNUATION:,,

(i) The age of superannuation for teachers in Degree Level Technical Institutions has been enhanced from 62 to 65 years for those involved in,,

classroom teaching in order to attract eligible people to the teaching career and to retain teachers in service for a longer period. Whereas there is no,,

shortage in the category of librarians who aren’t involved in classroom teaching, the increase in the age of superannuation from present 62 years",,

shall not be available to the category of librarian.,,

(ii) Subject to the availability of vacant position and fitness, teachers shall also be reemployed on contract appointment beyond the age of 65 years upto",,

the age of 70 years. Reemployment beyond the age of superannuation shall however, be done selectively for a limited period of three years i.e. the",,

first instance and another further period of two years purely on the basis of merit, experience, area of specialization and peer group review and only",,

against available vacant positions without affecting selection or promotion prospects of eligible teachers.,,

(iii) Whereas the enhancement the age of superannuation for teachers engaged in class room teaching is intended to attract eligible periods to a career,,

in teaching and to meet the shortage of teachers by retaining teachers in service for a longer period.â€​,,

In terms of Corrigendum issued on 26.11.2010, Arulmoni’s pay was fixed as Associate Professor along with Lecturer. In this background, when",,

the issue of date of Arulmoni’s superannuation arose, the Govt. of NCT of Delhi took the position that as Foreman Instructor, under the rules, he",,

held no post that was assigned classroom teaching responsibilities; it differed with the opinion and recommendations of the DTU. Consequently, it said",,

that the lower age of retirement applicable to non-teaching personnel applied to Arulmoni. Aggrieved, he approached the CAT. Â",,

Before the CAT, Arulmoni relied on all the previous GNCTD orders, including those re-designating him as an Associate Professor, orders granting",,

him career advancement in terms of norms applicable to teaching staff and other documents evidencing equivalence of Foreman Instructors with,,

Lecturers. The Govt. of NCT of Delhi argued that retirement age of Foreman Instructors in other institutes of GNCTD was 60 years. Consequently,",,

the DTU had to process Arulmoni’s case for retirement at the age of 60 years. It was argued that since Foreman Instructors had no promotional,,

avenues and were given only financial benefits they are treated at par with Lecturers for such purpose alone. NCT argued that the post of Foreman,,

Instructor had not been changed to Lecturer by it. It was highlighted that Office Order dated 29.07.2010 provided for revision of pay scale and other,,

service conditions of the teacher and other eligible staff of degree level technical institutions and not of Foreman Instructor.,,

Tribunal’s findings in the impugned order,,

The CAT compared the recruitment rules applicable to both Lecturers and Foremen Instructors and held that they did not contain any difference,,

with respect to pay scale, eligibility conditions, including educational qualifications, experience, etc. and that the terms and conditions applicable to both",,

was similar. It then considered pay parity, career advancement proposals and acceptance, redesignation of the posts and other material circumstances,",,

including the content of work assigned to Foremen Instructors. Particularly, the CAT examined that Arulmoni was assigned regular teaching",,

responsibilities and was asked to set and correct examination papers.,,

It therefore, held that the DTU’s decision not to treat him as entitled to the benefit of higher age of retirement was on account of the Govt. of",,

NCT’s decision (i.e. the competent authority) and that the nomenclature difference in his case (i.e. Foreman Instructor as opposed to,,

Lecturer/Professor) was not material. He was directed to be treated at par with such teaching staff, and also entitled to the enhanced age of",,

retirement.Â,,

Mr. Naushad, learned counsel for the Govt. of NCT argued that Arulmoni is an employee of Govt. of NCT of Delhi and other foreman-instructors",,

employed with Govt. of NCT of Delhi retire at the age of 60 years and not at 65 years. If he is given the benefit of enhancement of age of,,

retirement to 65 years from 62 years (62 years done by DTU without approval of the Government) it will lead to unsettling consequences and,,

,Lecturer,"Foreman Instructor

(Associate

Professors)

Recruitment,"Direct

          Â

through UPSC","Direct through

UPSC

Group of Service,Group A Gazzetted,Â

Pay scale at the same point of

joining","2200-75-2800-100-

4000","2200-75-2800-100-

4000

Eligibility criteria First class bachelor Degree in app,ropriate Branch of Engineerin,"g.F Dirsets cirlaabssle b Tawchoe lyoerars

Degree

        Â

in appropriate Branch

of EngineeringÂ

DesirableÂ

Two years

Â,"Professional/teachi ng

experience out of which at

least one year should be in

the shop floor of a

        Â

large

Engineering workshop of

repute.","Professional/teachi

ng experience out of

which at least one

year should be in the

shop floor of a

      Â

large

Engineering workshop

of repute

Xxx,Xxx,Xxx

CAS Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â (Career

Advance Schemes)",Â,Â

Senior                  Scale

(Rs.10,000-325- 15200)",Yes,Yes

Selection

Scale(Rs.12000-

420- 18300)",Yes,Yes

POB IV scale,Yes,Yes

Nature of Duties,Yes,Yes

Classroom Teaching,Yes,Yes

Laboratory instructions,Yes,Yes

Student assessment and evaluation including University

examination work.",Yes,Yes

Supervising

Students, Research and Project Work",Yes,Yes

Developing learning Resource material and laboratory

development",Yes,Yes

Attending

National/Internatio nal conferences, Seminars, Faculty

Development

Programs and Short Term Courses, etc",Yes,Yes

Administration both at department level as well as

College/University level.",Yes,Yes

Age

                         Â

of

Superannuation",65 Years,62 Years

(65). The NCT’s plea lacks merit; consequently, the directions of CAT shall be implemented within 6 weeks. Arulmoni shall be entitled to",,

differential pay, and all benefits that a regularly placed official of his equivalent rank would have been entitled to, till attainment of 65 years. The pay",,

fixation order along with consequential arrears, for the relevant period shall be released within 10 weeks. The petition is dismissed, but in these terms.",,