Interpretation of Promotion Criteria in University/College Setting

The legal case summarized here delves into the nuanced interpretation of promotion criteria within the University and College framework. The court’s analysis focused on crucial provisions related to direct recruitment and promotions under the Career Advancement Scheme. By emphasizing the preamble and title of the statute, the court aimed to provide clarity on the effective dates and eligibility conditions for promotions in the higher education sector.


  • Civil appeal filed by Karnataka University against the judgment of the High Court.
  • High Court dismissed the writ appeal and upheld the order of the learned Single Judge.
  • Effective date of ‘Career Advancement 1 Scheme’ promotion was determined to be 01.01.2009 for the first respondent-writ petitioner.
  • Division Bench interpreted ‘colleges’ to include both constituent and affiliated colleges under the Statute.
  • Affirmed that service in affiliated colleges should be considered for promotion under CAS.
  • Writ petitioner entitled to promotion from 01.01.2009 instead of 28.10.2013.
  • Magnanimous interpretation given to the wordings ‘University/Colleges’ in Clause 12.7 of the Statute.
  • The writ petitioner was earlier working as an Associate Professor in J.S.S College affiliated to Karnataka University.
  • The CAS promotion was given to the writ petitioner from 28.10.2013 onwards.
  • The Syndicate of the University rejected the writ petitioner’s claim for CAS promotion from 01.01.2009.
  • The writ petitioner filed a writ petition in the High Court challenging the Syndicate’s decision.
  • The High Court allowed the writ petition, stating that the writ petitioner should have been considered for promotion from 01.01.2009.
  • The writ petitioner was eventually promoted to the post of Professor from 28.10.2013, after appearing for an interview and receiving a recommendation from the Board of Appointment.

Also Read: Challenging Legal Analysis in 1989 Scheme Eligibility Case


  • Respondent No.1, a writ petitioner, was working as an Associate Professor in an affiliated college before joining the appellant-University.
  • Upon joining the University as an Assistant Professor, respondent No.1 was promoted to the position of Professor with effect from 28.10.2013.
  • The appellant-University contends that respondent No.1 was not eligible for the position of Professor at the time of recruitment.
  • The interpretation of the statute by the High Court is called into question by the appellant-University.
  • The term ‘principals of Constituent Colleges’ in the statute is emphasized to be read disjunctively for clarity.
  • The statute requires the candidate to have been on the rolls of the University or a Constituent College for promotion.
  • The High Court correctly interpreted the statute regarding the effective date of promotion.
  • The High Court found that the effective date of promotion should have been 01.01.2009 instead of 28.10.2013.
  • There are no grounds to interfere with the judgment of the High Court based on this interpretation.
  • Certain relevant provisions of the statute governing direct recruitment and promotion under CAS were mentioned.
  • The preamble and title of the statute were referenced for clarity.

Also Read: Legal Analysis of Unilateral Cancellation of Registered Sale Deed


  • The Division Bench and the High Court wrongly interpreted the wordings ‘University/Colleges’ in the Statute.
  • The promotion under CAS requires the incumbent teacher to hold a substantive sanctioned post and be on active service of the University/College during the selection process.
  • The High Court erred in extending benefits to the respondent based on service in an affiliated college, contrary to the statute.
  • The definition of ‘College’ must align with the preamble of the statute for granting promotions under CAS.
  • Interpreting ‘Principals of Constituent Colleges’ disjunctively would go against the objectives of the statute.
  • Assistant Professors completing three years of teaching in third grade are eligible to be designated as Associate Professor after meeting qualifying conditions and API based PBAS requirements.
  • Associate Professors completing three years of service in stage 4 and holding a Ph.D. Degree in the relevant discipline can be appointed as Professor after satisfying required credit points and undergoing assessment by a selection committee.
  • Teachers without a Ph.D. are not eligible for promotion or appointment as Professor.
  • Promotion under the scheme is to be given from the entry of service into the University.
  • Earlier service is to be counted for the purpose of promotion benefits.
  • Effective date for all purposes is only from the date of entry into University service.
  • The University is not expected to grant promotion for the period before the entry of service into the University.

Also Read: Legal Analysis in Conviction Case


  • The University has rightly given the benefit of promotion from 28.10.2013.
  • Judgment and Order dated 02.01.2020 passed by the High Court in writ No 100436 of 2019 (S-PRO) is quashed and set aside.
  • Consequently, the writ petition filed by the first respondent in writ petition No 100353 of 2018 (C-PRO) stands dismissed.


Case Number: C.A. No.-004079-004079 / 2020

Click here to read/download original judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *