Identically qualified employees cannot be denied parity in promotion without a legally sustainable distinction.

The applicant, a General Line Teacher, possessed an M.Sc. in Forestry, Wildlife and Environmental Science from Guru Ghasidas University, Bilaspur

Government Order No. 325-Edu of 2019 dated 16 October 2019 sanctioned the temporary placement of eligible Post Graduate Masters/Teachers as Incharge Lecturers in Environmental Science in their own pay and grade, and the applicant’s name appeared at Serial No. 30

However, during document verification, his placement was withheld because the nomenclature of his degree was not precisely “M.Sc. Environmental Science”.

The applicant relied on the case of Mr. Ifthikar Rashid Wani, who allegedly possessed the same degree from the same university and had been promoted/placed as Lecturer in Environmental Science.

His representation was forwarded by the Director to the Government for a decision regarding equivalence, but no final decision was taken.

The respondents contended that the applicable Recruitment Rules, notified by SRO 481 dated 30 December 2010, prescribed M.Sc. Environmental Science and that equivalence of the applicant’s degree had not yet been formally determined.

Whether the applicant, whose name was included in the Government Order for placement as Incharge Lecturer in Environmental Science, could be denied such placement solely because his degree was designated M.Sc. (Forestry, Wildlife and Environmental Science) rather than M.Sc. Environmental Science

Whether the applicant was entitled to parity of treatment with Mr. Ifthikar Rashid Wani, who allegedly possessed the same qualification from the same university and had been granted promotion/placement in Environmental Science.

Whether the respondents could keep the applicant’s claim pending on the ground that equivalence was under consideration while simultaneously denying placement on the assumption that his degree was not equivalent

The Tribunal applied the applicable Gazetted Service Recruitment Rules, 2010, notified through SRO 481 dated 30 December 2010, under which M.Sc. Environmental Science was the prescribed qualification for promotion as Lecturer in Environmental Science.

It further applied the constitutional principles of equality and non-discrimination under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, holding that similarly situated employees must be treated alike and that differential treatment requires a rational and legally sustainable distinction.

The Tribunal also applied the principle that the State cannot adopt inconsistent standards by granting a benefit to one employee possessing a particular qualification while denying the same benefit to another identically situated employee, unless the distinction is specifically established.

Mere difference in nomenclature, by itself, is insufficient to deny consideration where equivalence has been recognized in comparable cases.

The Tribunal found that the applicant’s name had already been included in the 2019 placement order and that his placement was withheld only during subsequent verification because of the nomenclature of his degree.

The applicant specifically asserted that Mr. Wani had the same degree, from the same university, and had nevertheless received promotion/placement in Environmental Science.

The respondents did not specifically controvert this assertion or identify any factual, legal, or service-related distinction between the two employees.

Consequently, the respondents could not both maintain that equivalence remained pending before the Higher Education Department and conclusively deny the applicant’s eligibility on the ground that his degree was not equivalent.

Applying Articles 14 and 16, the Tribunal held that denial of parity without a demonstrated distinction was unsustainable, subject to verification of the identity and continuing validity of Mr. Wani’s qualification and placement.

The respondents were directed to verify whether Mr. Wani had been promoted or placed as Lecturer in Environmental Science on the basis of the same M.Sc. (Forestry, Wildlife and Environmental Science) degree from Guru Ghasidas University and whether that benefit continued to remain valid.

If verified, the applicant was to be granted placement as Incharge Lecturer in Environmental Science under Government Order No. 325-Edu of 2019 dated 16 October 2019, from the date on which similarly situated employees received such placement, along with notional seniority/placement and consequential service benefits.

Monetary benefits were to be governed by the terms of the Government Order and applicable rules.

The exercise was to be completed within 12 weeks, and any adverse decision was required to be supported by a reasoned and speaking order identifying the specific distinction, rather than relying merely on the difference in nomenclature.

No order as to costs.