Different group of employees not eligible for same benefits upon similar qualification: SC

New Delhi: Different groups of employees, who may be working in aid but are governed by separate sets of rules, are not eligible for the same benefits upon obtaining similar qualifications, the Supreme Court held on Thursday.

A bench of Justices JK Maheshwari and Rajesh Bindal set aside July 21, 2010 order of the Delhi High Court and a 2003 order of the Central Administrative Tribunal asking the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR) to extend benefit of 1999 scheme to its technical staffs at par with the scientists upon acquiring a Ph.D degree.

Under the February 27, 1999 scheme introduced by the ICAR, a scientist was eligible for two advance increments upon acquiring a Ph.D. degree during his service. The ICAR refused to give the benefit of scheme to its technical staff contending that it constituted two services namely the Agricultural Research Service and Technical Service, and both the services are governed by their independent sets of rules having different cadres and different promotional avenues.

It argued that CAT had travelled beyond the jurisdiction vested in it and wrongly opined that both categories of employees are working with the ICAR for the same object, hence, there should not be any distinction.

The bench accepted the submission of the ICAR and said merely after having Ph.D. qualification, the technical personnel will not become eligible for grant of two advance increments when the same has not been recommended for them.

“Merely because different sets of employees, who may be working in aid but governed by different sets of rules and having different duties to discharge also obtain that qualification, will not entitle them to the benefits which were extended to different sets of

employees by competent authority,” it ruled.

The bench further said in any institution incentives may be given to a particular category of employees to get higher qualifications during service considering their job requirements.

“Merely because Study Leave Regulations, 1991 were extended to technical personnel, this would not entitle them to other benefits which are available to the scientists. The idea of grant of study leave for pursuing Ph.D. to the technical personnel was only to enable them to improve their qualifications,” the top court said.

Justice Bindal, who wrote the verdict on behalf of the bench, rejected the arguments of technical staff that after obtaining the Ph.D. qualification, they were entitled to be considered for lateral entry into the scientists.

“...the additional qualification merely makes them eligible for the higher post in the different cadre and not to grant them benefits, which are attached to the higher post in a different cadre,” the bench held.

It ruled that the CAT and the high court have erred by equating technical personnel and scientists and granting the technical staff of ICAR advance increments to which they are not entitled to.