-1- 2025:CGHC:37570 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1088 of 2021 Prahlad Prasad Lathia S/o Shri Kaushal Prasad Lathia Aged About 50 Years Presently Posted As Librarian At Government College Lormi, District Mungeli Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, Department Of Higher Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Atal Nagar Nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 - Under Secretary Department Of Higher Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan,nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 - Commissioner Department Of Higher Education, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan,nawa Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh 4 - University Grand Commission Through The Secretary Government Of India Bahadur Shah Zafar Marg New Delhi 110002 ... Respondent(s) (Cause Title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Ghanshyam Kashyap, Advocate For State : Mr. Rajkumar Gupta, Additional Advocate General For Respondent No.4 : Mr. Jitendra Nath Nande, Advocate with Mr. Ankit Bhoi, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey Order on Board Digitally signed by NADIM MOHLE -2- 31.07.2025 1) The petitioner has filed this petition seeking the following relief(s):- “10.1 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to grant the benefit of Senior Scale w.e.f. 06.08.2004. 10.2 The Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondent authority to grant the financial benefit of Selection Grade w.e.f. 06.08.2009. 10.3 the Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant any other writ/ writs, order/ orders, relief/ reliefs in favour of the petitioner, which the Hon'ble Court deemed fit & just in the facts and circumstances of the case, including awarding of the costs to the petitioner.” 2) Mr. Kashyap, learned counsel for the petitioner, would submit that the petitioner was appointed to the post of Assistant Librarian under respondent No.1/ Government Rajeev Gandhi Arts & Commerce College, Lormi vide order dated 06.08.1998. He further submits that as per the revised Career Advancement Scheme (for short, CAS), issued by the University Grants Commission (for short, UGC) on 19.10.2006 and approved by the Ministry of Human Resource Development, the petitioner became eligible for placement in the Senior Scale after completion of six years of service, and further became eligible for the Selection Grade after completion of five years in the Senior Scale or after completion of eleven years of service, subject to fulfillment of the requisite conditions. He would also submit that the petitioner had completed the Orientation Programme in 2007 and obtained a Refresher Course certificate in 2009-10; accordingly, he was entitled to be placed in the Senior Scale as early as -3- 2004 and the Selection Grade in the year 2009. However, the benefits were granted at a belated stage; the Senior Scale was conferred only on 31.05.2009 and the Selection Grade on 31.05.2014. The petitioner made repeated representations for redressal of his grievances, but to no avail. Hence, he prays for the issuance of appropriate directions to extend the benefits from the due dates. 3) On the other hand, Mr. Gupta, learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State, would submit that the petitioner did not fulfil the eligibility conditions for placement on Senior Scale in the year 2004 and for Selection Grade in 2009. He further submits that under the CAS dated 19.10.2006, for placement in the Senior Scale, the candidate was required to complete six years of regular service and participation in two refresher/orientation courses of at least four weeks’ duration each, along with consistent satisfactory performance appraisal. 4) Mr. Gupta would further contend that the petitioner completed the requisite Orientation Programme in 2007 and the Refresher Course in 2009. Hence, only upon fulfillment of these requirements, the benefit of Senior Scale was granted to him vide order dated 31.05.2009. Thereafter, upon completion of five years in the Senior Scale and meeting the eligibility conditions, the benefit of Selection Grade was extended vide order dated 31.05.2014. He would also submit that the petition is misconceived and deserves to be dismissed. -4- 5) Mr. Nande supports the arguments advanced by Mr. Gupta. 6) Mr. Kashyap contends that other similarly situated Assistant Librarians were granted benefits earlier, and the petitioner has been subjected to discriminatory treatment. In response, Mr. Gupta submits that eligibility criteria cannot be claimed on the basis of parity unless the eligibility criteria as per the scheme are independently satisfied. 7) I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the documents placed in the file. 8) The relevant provisions of the Career Advancement Scheme dated 19.10.2006 issued by the UGC read as follows:- “Clause (i): Every Assistant Librarian in a university and a Librarian in a College Librarian, who is in the scale of pay of Rs.8000-275- 13500, will be eligible for placement in the Senior Scale of Rs.10000-325-15200 if he/she has: (a) completed 6 years of service as University Assistant Librarian/College Librarian after regular appointment; (b) participated in two refresher courses/summer institutes, each of not less than four weeks duration or engaged in other appropriate continuing education programme of comparable quality, as may be specified by the UGC, and consistently satisfactory performance appraisal reports. Clause(ii): Every Assistant Librarian in the universities who has been placed in the Senior Scale will be eligible for promotion to the post of Deputy Librarian in the scale of pay of Rs. 12000-420-18300 if he/she has: -5- (a) completed 5 years of service in the Senior Scale provided that the requirement of 5 years will be relaxed if his/her total service is not less than 11 years; (b) obtained a Ph.D. degree or has an equivalent published work; (c) made significant contribution to the development of Library service in the University as evident from self-assessment, reports of referees, professional improvement in the Library services, etc; as the case may be; (d) participated in two refresher courses/summer institutes, each of not less than four weeks duration or engaged in other appropriate continuing education programme of comparable quality, as may be specified by the UGC after placement in the Senior Scale; and (e) consistently satisfactory performance appraisal reports.” 9)In the present case, the petitioner completed six years of service in 2004 but had not completed the required Orientation/Refresher Courses by that time. The petitioner completed the Orientation Programme in the year 2007 and the Refresher Course in the year 2009; consequently, the authorities granted the benefit of Senior Scale on 31.05.2009. 10)With regard to the Selection Grade, the petitioner was granted the same vide order dated 31.05.2014 after completion of five years in the Senior Scale. The petitioner did not place on record any material showing fulfillment of additional criteria such as a Ph.D. degree, equivalent published work, or contribution to library development prior to that date. 11)With regard to the claim of parity with other Assistant Librarians, it is a well settled principle of law that eligibility for promotion or placement under the CAS is governed by fulfillment of the requisite conditions and cannot be claimed -6- merely on the basis of equality or parity, unless supported by material to show equal standing in terms of qualifications, service record and other criteria. 12)In view of the above analysis, I find no infirmity in the action of the respondent authorities in granting the benefit of Senior Scale on 31.05.2009 and Selection Grade on 31.05.2014 after fulfillment of the requisite conditions by the petitioner. The reliefs claimed by the petitioner for retrospective placement from 2004 and 2009, respectively, are misconceived and cannot be granted. Accordingly, the writ petition is hereby dismissed. No cost(s). Sd/- (Rakesh Mohan Pandey) Judge Nadim