GOPAL KRISHNA SHARMA AND ORS. ETC. versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

Citation: [1992] SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 605 · Decided: 16-09-1992 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.M. AHMADI · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

GOPAL KRISHNA SHARMA AND ORS. ETC. 
A 
v. 
STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. 
SEPTEMBER 16, 1992 
[AM. AHMADI, M.M. PUNCHHI AND K. RAMASWAMY, JJ.] 
B 
Civil Services : 
Rajasthan Universities Teachers and Officers (Special Conditions of 
Service) Act-Research Associates whether Research Assistants-Revised C 
UGC scale of Rs.700-1601>-Whether Research Assistants/Associates eligible 
by virlue of Nihal Singh's case-Supreme Coutt's direction. 
The respondent-University refused to grant Research Assistants/As-
sociates the scale of Rs.700-1600 recommended by the University Grants 
Commission (UGC) with effect from 1st January, 1973, even though the D 
Sukhadia University, Rajasthan, (earlier known as University ofUdaipur) 
implemented the UGC recommendations and granted the UGC scales in 
the case of other members of the teaching staff. Hence this batch of Writ 
Petitions under Article 32 of the Constitntion. 
The UGC's recommendation of the revision of pay scales of Univer-
sity and College teachers in Its report (1975-76) was approved by the 
Government of India. 
E 
The three pay scales approved for University and College teachers 
were Rs. 700-1600 for Lecturers and Assistant Professors, Rs.1200-1900 
F 
for Readers and Rs.1500-2500 for Professors, replacing the then prevailing 
pay scales of Rs.400-950, Rs.700-1250 and Rs. 1100-1600, respectively, with 
effect from 1.1.1973. 
The University refused to grant the lowest pay scale of Rs.700-1600 G 
to the Research Assistants. 
The petitioners-Research Assistants/Associates contended that the 
benefit of the revised UGC scale was extended to Junior Lecturers who 
were then in the scale of Rs.300-600; that the Indian Council of Agriculture 
Research (!CAR) without making any distinction between academic, re- H 
605 
606 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS(1992J SUPP. 1 S.C.R. 
A search and extension work in Agriculture Universities, extended the 
benefit of the revised UGC scales to Extention/Research Assistants, if they 
possessed the qualifications of Lecturers and were recognised as teachers 
under the University Statutes; that the benefit of the revised UGC scales 
was extended to the Junior Lecturers; that the post of Research Assistant 
B in the University was equivalent to that of Junior Lecturer, being in the 
same scale of Rs.300-600; that the Research Assistants of Agricultural 
Universities in the States of Haryana, Punjab and Himachal Pradesh were 
placed in the scale of Rs.700-1600; that Research and Extention staff 
declared 'Teachers' under the University Statute wonld be eligible for the 
UGC revised pay scale; that they feel within the definition of 'Teacher' in 
C section 2(j) of the Udaipur University Act, 1962; that a person who was 
appointed by the University for conducting and guiding nosearch falls 
within the scope and ambit of the difinition of "Teacher'; that a Research 
Assistant employed for conducting and guiding research was to be 
regarded as belonging to the teaching faculty and would, therefore be 
D entitled to be placed in the UGC scale of Rs.700-1600 with elf•.ct from 
1.1. 73; that Research Associates were basically teachers as they impart 
instructions, and/or conduct and guide research/extension work, and 
hence their work was same as that of the Research Assistants who were 
placed in the UGC scale of Rs. 700· 1600 by virtue of !he decision in Nihal 
Singh's case and, therefore, under the equality clause of Article 14 they too 
E were entitled to the same pay scale of Rs.700-1600. 
The petitioners further submitted that one Dr. Nihal Singh in a Writ 
Petition No.39 of 1979 under Article 226 of the Constitution challenged the 
stand of the University in the High Court. The Single Judge of the High 
F Court ruled that Research Assistants fell within the extended meaning of 
'Lecturers' in clause (v) or Statute 47 and since that term was inclusive or 
'equivalent posts in Research and' Extensions', they were entitled to be 
placed in the scale of Rs. 700-1600, more so because they were 'teachers' 
as defined in section 2(j); and that the petitioner before him should be 
notionally placed in that scale with effect from 2. 7. 7 4, the date from which 
G the term 'Lecturer' was substituted for the words 'Junion Lecturer'; that 
be was to be given monetary benefits from 1.9.76 from which date other 
Lecturers were given this benefit. When the matter was carried in appeal 
before a Division Bench of the High Court the Division Bench affirmed the 
view expre

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.