Post-Conversion to Central University, Competence over Pay Scale Decisions Vest Exclusively with Union Ministry of Education

The petitioner was appointed as a Technical Assistant in the Physics Department of H.N.B. Garhwal University on December 1, 2006.

He sought pay parity with Technical Assistants in the Department of Ancient History and Archaeology who were in a higher pay scale.

While the Registrar recommended this to the State Government in 2007, the University transitioned from a State University to a Central University on January 15, 2009, under the Central Universities Act, 2009.

On July 9, 2021, the State Government approved the pay parity, provided the financial burden was borne by the Central University.

However, the University's Finance Committee rejected the approval in 2022, asserting that the State Government lacked jurisdiction over a Central University.

1. Whether the State Government of Uttarakhand had the competence to approve a pay scale up-gradation for employees of a University after it achieved "Central University" status.

2. Whether the Ministry of Education, Government of India, is the appropriate authority to resolve financial and pay parity grievances following the University's transition to a Central entity.

The court applied the legal principle of jurisdictional competence arising from the Central Universities Act, 2009, which transitioned the institution's governance from the State to the Union.

Once an institution is statutory transformed into a Central University, the State Government ceases to be the "appropriate government" or competent authority for determining pay scales and financial liabilities.

Financial decisions involving Central Universities fall under the administrative and budgetary purview of the Ministry of Education, Government of India.

The court analyzed the timeline of the petitioner’s claim against the change in the University’s legal status, noting that although the claim originated in 2007, it remained pending during the 2009 transition.

The court reasoned that the State Government's 2021 order was invalid because, by that time, the State no longer possessed the authority to dictate pay structures or impose financial burdens on a Central University.

The court accepted the University's contention that it lacks independent financial resources to grant parity without federal approval.

The court found that the administrative "deadlock" between the State's approval and the University's refusal necessitated a fresh determination by the Central Government, as the current funding and administrative body.

The writ petition was disposed of with directions: the petitioner is permitted to submit a representation to the Registrar within two weeks; the Registrar must forward said representation with comments to the Ministry of Education, Government of India; and the Ministry is directed to pass a speaking order as per law within four months.