The Rajasthan High Court has modified an order issued by the State Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, which had directed a college to grant two annual increments to an Economics lecturer from the date of her Ph.D. completion in 1998.

The High Court took note of the fact that the lecturer had only raised her claim for these benefits in 2016, leading to the modification of the tribunal’s directive.

The court noted that since the lecturer had not submitted a written request for arrears after obtaining her Ph.D. degree, the Tribunal had no basis to direct the college management to grant her two annual increments from the date of completion of her degree.

Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand, in his order, noted that the lecturer "remained silent" from 1998 to 2016, failing to make any request or application for benefits, thereby causing the delay in approaching the Tribunal herself.

"Perusal of the record indicates that the respondent No.1 was appointed as a Lecturer-Economics in the petitioner-department and during her tenure, she pursued her Ph.D and thereafter, she received her Ph.D degree in the year 1998. The documents annexed with her application before the Tribunal along with the application under Section 21 of the Act of 1989, indicates that for the first time, a demand was raised by the respondent No.1 for grant of arrears, in the year 2016, prior to that no written application was submitted by her with the petitioner-management along with the requisite degree

Once this fact has been established on record that prior to 01.08.2016, neither any request was made by the respondent No.1 nor any application in writing was submitted by her for grant of benefits of arrears after passing her Ph.D Degree, hence, there was no reason or occasion available with the Tribunal for issuing directions to the petitioner-management for grant of two annual increments to the respondent with effect from the date when she passed and completed her Ph.D Degree.

The respondent No.1 remained silent from the date of passing of Ph.D Degree i.e. from the year 1998 till 2016. She herself woke up in the year 2016 and submitted an application for grant of benefits. Thereafter, she herself caused delay in approaching the Tribunal by way of filing an application under Section 21 of the Act of 1989".

The Court also referred to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Union of India & Ors. v. Tarsem Singh, where a similar situation was addressed. The Apex Court held that if a claim is raised after a significant delay, arrears would be restricted to three years prior to the filing of the writ petition. In this case, the respondent was appointed as a lecturer at the College and completed her Ph.D. in 1998.

However, she first sought the benefits of annual increments based on her Ph.D. in 2016, a demand that was accepted by the Tribunal. The Tribunal directed the College to grant her two annual increments effective from 1998, the year she completed her Ph.D. This order was subsequently challenged by the College.

The court accordingly modified the Tribunal's order, stating that the lecturer would be entitled to receive the benefits of two annual increments starting from August 1, 2018, the date when she first submitted an application for arrears to the college management.

"The petitioner-management is directed to make payment to two annual increments and accordingly, re-fixation of her salary and all consequential benefits be made to the respondent No.1 with effect from 01.08.2016 with interest," the court added.

The court directed that if the college management encounters any difficulty in implementing the order, it should write to the State requesting the petitioner's service book, with an assurance that it would be returned after compliance.  

With this, the plea was disposed of.

Case Title: Managing Committee & Anr. v Dr. Vijay Laxmi & Anr.