Notional appointment benefits run from qualification-equivalence date, but no back wages accrue for intervening non-service.

The University of Kashmir invited applications for the post of Lecturer in Botany through advertisement dated 14 January 2004. Rifat John, who possessed an M.Sc. in Environmental Botany, a Ph.D., and NET-JRF and GATE qualifications, participated in the selection process and was placed at Serial No. 6 in the select list.

Her appointment was deferred because the University required verification of the equivalence of her degree with the prescribed qualification.

In proceedings in SWP No. 607/2007, the High Court directed the University Syndicate to decide the equivalence issue and, if equivalence was granted, to issue her an appointment order.

The University’s Equivalence Committee subsequently recognized her M.Sc. Environmental Botany degree as equivalent to the M.Sc. Botany degree of the University of Kashmir in its meeting dated 04 June 2008.

Following further litigation, the applicant was appointed as Assistant Professor in Botany by order dated 01 November 2011, but only prospectively.

Her request for retrospective or notional effect from the date of selection was rejected, including by communication dated 21 October 2015, leading to the present transferred application.

Whether the applicant’s appointment as Assistant Professor in Botany should be given notional effect from 04 June 2008, when the University’s Equivalence Committee recognized her qualification as equivalent to the prescribed qualification.

Whether the applicant was entitled to consequential or notional service benefits for the period between 04 June 2008 and her formal joining on 01 November 2011, subject to applicable rules and the principle of “No Work, No Pay”.

Whether the respondents were required to reconsider the applicant’s claim without relying upon the communication dated 21 October 2015.

The Tribunal applied the principle that a duly selected candidate whose qualification is subsequently recognized as equivalent may be considered for notional appointment-related benefits from the date on which the eligibility impediment is removed, subject to applicable service rules and the existence of no other legal or factual impediment.

It further applied the principle of “No Work, No Pay,” holding that notional service benefits cannot extend to payment of salary or other monetary emoluments for a period during which the applicant did not actually work.

The Tribunal also directed that the claim be examined in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations governing consequential or notional service benefits.

The applicant’s selection was undisputed, and her name appeared in the select list for the relevant post.

The Tribunal treated 04 June 2008 as the material date because, on that date, the Equivalence Committee removed the qualification-related impediment by recognizing her degree as equivalent to the prescribed qualification.

Although her formal appointment was issued only on 01 November 2011, the Tribunal considered it appropriate to direct reconsideration of notional appointment benefits from the date of equivalence, while leaving the actual grant and extent of consequential benefits to the competent authority under the governing rules.

At the same time, because the applicant had not actually worked during the intervening period, the Tribunal expressly excluded salary and other monetary benefits under the “No Work, No Pay” principle.

The respondents were also directed not to rely upon the earlier communication dated 21 October 2015 while undertaking the reconsideration, subject to any independent legal or factual impediment.

The exercise was required to be completed within six weeks and the decision communicated to the applicant thereafter.

No salary or other monetary benefits were payable for the period between 04 June 2008 and her actual joining pursuant to the appointment order dated 01 November 2011.

The respondents were directed not to take the communication dated 21 October 2015 into consideration, subject to the absence of any other legal or factual impediment.

The application and connected miscellaneous applications were accordingly disposed of without costs.