Merely After Having Ph.D. Qualification, Technical Personnel Will Not Become Eligible For Grant Of Two Advance Increments: SC Allows ICAR’s Appeal
The Supreme Court allowed the Indian Council of Agricultural Research’s appeal against the order of Central Administrative Tribunal (Tribunal) which extended the technical staff of the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) the benefit of the scheme in terms of which a scientist was eligible for two advance increments as and when they acquired a Ph.D. degree in their service career.
The bench of J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Rajesh Bindal observed, “Merely after having Ph.D. qualification, the technical personnel will not become eligible for grant of two advance increments when the same has not been recommended for them. In any institution incentives may be given to a particular category of employees to get higher qualifications during service, considering their job requirements.”
Advocate Praveen Swarup represented the appellant, while Sr. Advocate K. B. Sounder Rajan appeared for the respondents.
A circular issued by ICAR provided for two advance increments to scientists upon acquiring a Ph.D. degree during their service. The respondents, who were technical personnel employed by the Indian Agricultural Research Institute (IARI), sought similar benefits, arguing that their Ph.D. qualifications equally enhanced their contributions to agricultural research.
The technical personnel had initially approached the Tribunal, which extended them the benefit of the scheme, followed by the High Court, which upheld the Tribunal's decision. However, the Supreme Court, upon hearing the appeal from ICAR, set aside the decision of both the Courts.
The Court held that the Tribunal and the High Court erred by equating the technical personnel and scientists and granting the technical personnel advance increments to which they are not entitled.
The Bench noted that the technical personnel were governed by different sets of rules, had their channel of promotion, and had different qualifications prescribed for recruitment. The duties assigned to them were also different as compared to the scientists, who are engaged in core work of agricultural research and education whereas the technical personnel provided support in different areas.
The Court remarked, “Merely because Study Leave Regulations, 1991 were extended to technical personnel, this would not entitle them to other benefits which are available to the scientists. The idea of grant of study leave for pursuing Ph.D. to the technical personnel was only to enable them to improve their qualifications.”
Consequently, the Court held, “Merely because different set of employees, who may be working in aid but governed by different set of rules and having different duties to discharge also obtain that qualification, will not entitle them to the benefits which were extended to different set of employees by the competent authority. In the said sequel of facts, Article 14 of the Constitution of India will not have any application.”
Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal.
Cause Title: Indian Council Of Agricultural Research v. Rajinder Singh & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 622)
Appearance:
Appellant: Advocates Praveen Swarup, Ameet Singh, Payal Swarup, Aditi Singh, Devesh Maurya, Syed Zafar Husain, Baij Nath Yadav, Ravi Kumar and K. P. Singh
Respondents: Sr Advocate K. B. Sounder Rajan; AOR Sudarshan Rajan; Advocates Mahesh Kumar, Srishti Sharma, Ramesh Rawat, Rohit Bhardwaj, Hitain Bajaj, Sachin S, Ashutosh Gupta and Nand Ram
Click here to reMerely after having Ph.D. qualification, the technical
personnel will not become eligible for grant of two advance
incremad/download the Judgment
