1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 2345 of 2018 1 - Dr. Smt. Suman Singh Baghel W/o Sachin Singh Baghel, Aged About 57 Years R/o Hig 65, Shristi Colony, Rajnandgaon, At Present Principal, Government Shivnath Science College Rajnandgaon, District Chhattisgarh., District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Naya Raipur, District Raipur Chhattisgarh., District : Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh 2 - Commissioner, Higher Education Directorate Block C - 30, 2nd And 3rd Floor, Indrawati Bhawan New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh., District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Shri R.S. Baghel, Advocate. For Respondents/ State : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Dy.G.A. Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board 30.07.2025 1. The petitioner was awarded with Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D) in the subject of Sanskrit on 15.01.1998 for which she was SMT NIRMALA RAO 2 granted two advance increments w.e.f. 27.7.1998 in terms of clause 6.4.0 of UGC notification and Regulation On Revision Of Pay Scales, Minimum Qualification For Appointment of Teachers in Universities and Colleges and other Measures for Maintenance of Standards, 1998, duly accepted by the State of Madhya Pradesh vide Annexure P/2 dated 13.10.1999. The petitioner was granted selection grade w.e.f. 28.07.1998. She claimed that she is entitled for two advance increments from the date of being placed in selection grade i.e. 28.07.1998 in accordance with clause 6.3.0 and 6.4.0 of the Govt., but the same was not granted to her. 2. The petitioner placed in selection grade, became eligible for grant of two advance increments as per regulations issued by the UGC vide order dated 27.07.1998 (Annexure P/1) and having been adopted the same by the State of Madhya Pradesh on 13.10.1999 (Annexure P/2) and therefore entitled for grant of two advance increments from the date she being placed in the selection grade i.e. 27.08.1998. It has been averred that since the petitioner has already been granted two advance increments at the time of revision of pay w.e.f. 27.07.1998, after being awarded Ph.D, petitioner is not entitled for two further increments on being placed in selection grade and as such writ petition deserves to be dismissed. 3 3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that Govt. of India vide letter dated 27.07.1998 calling upon the State Govt. for accepting the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission and the scheme of the UGC including the incentive for the Ph.D and the UGC regulation (Annexure P/1) having been accepted and adopted by the State of MP in its entirety (Annexure P/2) binds and prohibits the successor State of Chhattisgarh from withholding the benefit of two advance increments on being placed in selection grade as envisaged under Govt. of India letter dated 27.07.1998 Clause 1(ii)(c), Clause 6.3.0 and Clause 9(c) and would further submit that order issued in the name of Governor by the State cannot be superseded or varied by any authority subordinate to the State Govt. and as such appropriate writ be issued commanding the State to consider the case of the petitioner for grant of two advance increments on being placed in selection grade w.e.f. 28.07.1998 by making absolute the rule issued. 4. Learned counsel appearing for the State would submit that the petitioner was not found entitled for further two advance increments as she was already granted two advance increments in the year 2006 w.e.f. 27.07.1998, and therefore, petitioner's prayer for grant of two advance increments on being placed in selection grade deserves to be dismissed as the same can be given once in service career. 4 5. I have heard the counsel appearing for the parties, considered their rival submissions and also perused the orders impugned with utmost circumspection. 6. The Govt. of India, Ministry of Human Resources Department has issued a memo on 27.07.1998 providing for revision of pay scales of teachers in Central Universities following the revision of pay scales of central government employees on the recommendations of the 5th Central Pay Commission, clause-ii of which provides for incentives for the Ph.D and M.phil sub-clause-c of which also provides that a Lecturer with Ph.D degree will be eligible for two advance increments when she moves into selection grade/ Reader. Thereafter, UGC notification on Revision of Pay Scales, Minimum Qualification For Appointment of Teachers in Universities and Colleges and other Measures for the Maintenance of Standards, 1998 came into existence. Clause-6 of said notification provides for incentives for Ph.D/M.Phil. Clause 6.3.0 and 6.4.0 provides as under: 6.3.0. A Lecturer with Ph.D. Will be eligible for two advance increments when she/he moves into selection grade/Reader. 6.4.0. A teacher will be eligible for two advance increments as and when she/he acquires a Ph.D. Degree in her/his service career. 5 7. Thereafter, the then State of Madhya Pradesh, Department of Higher Education, accepting the circular of notification of Central Govt. issued the order dated 11.10.1999 (Annexure P/2) which reads as under: e/;izns'k 'kklu mPPk f'k{kk foHkkx ea=ky;] oYyHk Hkou Hkksiky Hkksiky fnukad 11-10-1999 dzekad ,Q&1@233@99@38&1@99 Hkkjr 'kklu] ekuo lalk/ku fodkl ea=ky; (f'k{kk foHkkx)ds ifji= dzekad ,Q&1&22@97 ;w&1 fnukad 27 tqykbZ] 1998 ,oa fnukad 6 uoacj 1998 rFkk fo'ofo|ky; vuqnku vk;ksx ds i= dzekad ,Q&3&1@94 (PS) fnukad 24 fnlacj 1998 ds rkjrE; esa e/;izns'k 'kklu] lkekU; f'k{kk ds fo'ofo|ky; rFkk 'kkldh; egkfo|ky;ksa esa dk;Zjr f'k{kdksa] izkpk;ksZ] xzaFkikyksa rFkk 'kkjhfjd f'k{kk ds vf/kdkfj;ksa dks fnukad 01-01- 1996 ls fuEukuqlkj iqujhf{kr osrueku Lohd`r djrk gS& XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX 9 (l) ih0,p0Mh0 mikf/k /kkjd f'k{kd dks izos'k Js.kh osrueku@jhMj osrueku esa LFkkuu gksus ij nks vfxze osruo`f+);ksa dh ik=rk gksxhA 9 (n) izR;sd dk;Zjr f'k{kd dks vius lsokdky esa ih0,p0Mh0 mikf/k izkIr djus ij nks vfxze osruo`f+);ksa dh ik=rk gksxhA** 8. A close and clear perusal of Govt. of India memo dated 27.07.1998 and order dated 11.10.1999 would show that State of MP has accepted the notification of the UGC holding that Assistant Professors holding Ph.D. Degree on being placed in the selection grade would be entitled for two further increments. 9. On such a scheme laid down by the UGC, the State of MP has taken a decision to adopt the scheme as it is. Once such a notification issued by the UGC has been accepted by the State of MP, the same 6 is binding on the successor state of Chhattisgarh also and consequences would automatically follow. 10. The Supreme Court in case of Jagdish Prasad Sharma and others v. State of Bihar and Others1 has held as under : “However, within this class of institutions there is a separate group where the State Governments themselves have taken a decision to adopt the scheme. In such cases, the consequences envisaged in the scheme itself would automatically follow.” 11. Thus, in accordance with UGC notification entitling the Ph.D. Degree holder to have benefit of two increments on moving the selection grade having been accepted by the State of MP on 11.10.1999, the petitioner is also entitled for the said benefit w.e.f. 28.07.1998 as on the said date she was given selection grade. 12. The clause 9(c) and 9(d), both are different and separate clauses as clause 9(c) of circular clearly provides that Ph.D. holder Assistant Professor is entitled for two advance increments on being placed in to selection grade and clause 9(d) provides that Teacher would be entitled for two advance increments on obtaining Ph.D degree. Both cannot be read together by the authority subordinate to the State Government overreaching the order of State Government. This court in WPS No. 1776 of 2011 (Dr. Sadhana Shome v. State of Chhattisgarh & Others, decided on 09.11.2011) has taken a similar view. 1 2013 (8) SCC 633 7 13. As an upshot and analysis of the above-stated discussion, the petition is allowed and sequitur to that, and the respondent No.1 & 2 are directed to consider the petitioner's case for granting two advance increments in accordance with clause 9(c) of notification dated 11.10.1999 within three months from today with consequential benefits. No order as to cost. Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nimmi