105 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT RAJAN GOYAL UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION AND OTHERS CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA Present: Mr. Mr. Vipul Aggarwal, Senior Panel Counsel for Ms. Divya Godara, Advocate for the respondents No.3 and 4. * SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA CM-4230-CWP This application is filed by the the date of hearing in the main Writ Petition which is fixed for hearing for 05.05.2025. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the main Writ Petition i.e. today itself. CWP-21780-2022 1. The petitioner, in this Writ Petition, i.e. (a) he is assailing the provisions of Rules relating to Clause 10 (f) (iii) of the UGC Regulations, 2018, the UGC, which provides that the service experience of an IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CM-4228-CWP CM-4230-CWP Date of Decision: 2 RAJAN GOYAL V/s. UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION AND OTHERS HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA Mr. Harish Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Vipul Aggarwal, Senior Panel Counsel for applicant-respondent No.2. Ms. Divya Godara, Advocate for the respondents No.3 and 4. **** SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA, J. (Oral) CWP-2025 This application is filed by the respondent No.2 for pre the date of hearing in the main Writ Petition which is fixed for hearing for For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is allowed and the main Writ Petition i.e. CWP- 2022 (O&M) The petitioner, in this Writ Petition, is assailing the provisions of Rules relating to Clause 10 (f) (iii) of the UGC Regulations, 2018, laying down the minimum qualification which provides that the service experience of an IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP-2025, CM-4229-CWP-2025, CWP-2025, CM-4231-CWP-2025 in /and CWP-21780-2022 Date of Decision: 24th of March, 2025 ..…...Petitioner(s) UNIVERSITY GRANTS COMMISSION AND OTHERS .....Respondent(s) SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA the petitioner. Mr. JUSTICE MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA the petitioner. Mr. Vipul Aggarwal, Senior Panel Counsel-UOI, respondent No.2 for pre-poning the date of hearing in the main Writ Petition which is fixed for hearing for For the reasons mentioned in the application, the same is -21780-2022 is taken on board The petitioner, in this Writ Petition, has made two-fold prayers; is assailing the provisions of Rules relating to Clause 10 (f) (iii) laying down the minimum qualification by which provides that the service experience of an ad hoc lecturer Suresh Kumar 2025.04.01 09:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-21780-2022 can only be counted provided he is working against the regular post and (b) he is seeking awarding of requisite marks for the experience gaine the post of Assistant Professor in Computer Science and Technology Department 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits tha the said Clause was denied benefit of counting of his experience for the purpose of appointment dated 13.04.2022. 3. An application moved on beh that the said post has been earmarked for the candidate belonging Scheduled Caste category and the candidate said post under was re-advertised incumbent has been appointed against the under the new advertisement dated 08.09.2023 the documents regarding subsequently Professor in the Department of Computer Scheduled Category has been placed on record. 4. Keeping in view thereto, we find who is from the general category, 2022(O&M) can only be counted provided he is getting the rking against the regular post and (b) he is seeking awarding of requisite marks for the experience gained by him for the appointment to the post of Assistant Professor in Computer Science and Technology Department under advertised dated 13.04.2022. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits tha Clause 10 (f) (iii) of the UGC Regulations, 2018 was denied benefit of counting of his experience for the purpose of appointment on the post of Assistant Professor dated 13.04.2022. An application bearing No. CM moved on behalf of respondent No.2-Central University that the said post has been earmarked for the candidate belonging Scheduled Caste category and the candidate under the Scheduled Caste category advertised, whereafter the selection has been done and incumbent has been appointed against the Schedule the new advertisement dated 08.09.2023 the documents regarding advertisement subsequently appointment of Dr. Priyavrat on the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Computer Science Technology under the Scheduled Category has been placed on record. Keeping in view thereto, we find who is from the general category, is concerned, could not have getting the minimum pay scale and is rking against the regular post and (b) he is seeking awarding of d by him for the appointment to the post of Assistant Professor in Computer Science and Technology advertised dated 13.04.2022. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of Regulations, 2018, the petitioner was denied benefit of counting of his experience for the purpose of the post of Assistant Professor under the advertisement CM-4231-CWP-2024 has been Central University of Punjab, stating that the said post has been earmarked for the candidate belonging to the Scheduled Caste category and the candidate, who was selected against the category, did not join and the post hereafter the selection has been done and new Scheduled caste Category post the new advertisement dated 08.09.2023. Vide the said application, advertisement dated 08.09.2023 and the appointment of Dr. Priyavrat on the post of Assistant Science Technology under the Scheduled Category has been placed on record. Keeping in view thereto, we find that so far as the petitioner, is concerned, could not have competed Suresh Kumar 2025.04.01 09:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CWP-21780-2022 against the reserved found to be without any basis. 5. We provisions of the UGC Regulations process, however, become purely academic for 6. Accordingly, the prayers (a) rejected as having become otiose. 7. So far as the claim of the petitioner as against University, Patiala ( pay scale as he is working since 2011 and for the said purpose, learned counsel for respondents No.3 and 4 shall address arguments in this regard. Since, the challenge rejected and the well, we relegate merits relating to the other prayers of the petitioner. 8. All pending applications in this accordingly. March 24, 2025 Ess Kay Whether speaking / reasoned Whether Reportable 2022(O&M) reserved post and the claim of the petitioner for the without any basis. We have also noticed that the petitioner provisions of the UGC Regulations 2018 after participating in the selection owever, we need not to go into the said aspect become purely academic for the present purpose. Accordingly, the prayers (a) & (b) made b as having become otiose. So far as the claim of the petitioner as against University, Patiala (respondents No.3 and 4 pay scale as he is working since 2011 is concerned and for the said purpose, learned counsel for respondents No.3 and 4 shall address arguments in this regard. Since, the challenge and the prayers (a) & (b) made by the petitioner , we relegate this case to the learned Single Bench for hearing on merits relating to the other prayers of the petitioner. All pending applications in this accordingly. [SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA [MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA 2025 Whether speaking / reasoned : Whether Reportable : post and the claim of the petitioner for the said post is also noticed that the petitioner has challenged the after participating in the selection into the said aspect as the same has he present purpose. (b) made by the petitioner are So far as the claim of the petitioner as against the Punjabi respondents No.3 and 4) for seeking minimum of the is concerned, the same still survives and for the said purpose, learned counsel for respondents No.3 and 4 shall address arguments in this regard. Since, the challenge to the vires has been prayers (a) & (b) made by the petitioner are rejected as this case to the learned Single Bench for hearing on merits relating to the other prayers of the petitioner. All pending applications in this case are disposed of SANJEEV PRAKASH SHARMA] JUDGE [MEENAKSHI I. MEHTA] JUDGE : Yes / No : Yes / No Suresh Kumar 2025.04.01 09:18 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document