The Kerala High Court has affirmed that the University Grants Commission Regulations 2018 override conflicting state government orders on academic appointments, establishing that a Principal completing a five-year term must revert to the parent institution with the designation and pay of Professor. This ruling clarifies the hierarchy of regulatory authority in higher education and has immediate implications for service conditions of academic staff across aided colleges in Kerala.
Background & Facts
The Dispute
The dispute centers on whether Dr. Achamma Alex, a long-serving academic, was entitled to be redesignated as Professor with the pay grade of Level 14 (AGP Rs.10,000) upon completion of her five-year term as Principal of Christian College, Chengannoor, in accordance with Regulation 4.1.V.B.(ii) of the UGC Regulations 2018, or whether she was restricted to reverting to her prior post of Associate Professor (AGP Rs.9,000) under State Government Orders dated 29.06.2019 and 29.09.2019.
Key Facts
- Dr. Achamma Alex joined as Junior Lecturer in English at Marthoma College for Women on 16.01.1987 and was appointed to Christian College, Chengannoor, on 01.01.1988.
- She was promoted to Lecturer on 01.06.1989, Lecturer (Senior Grade) on 15.02.1995, and Lecturer (Selection Grade) on 01.06.1999.
- She was appointed Associate Professor with AGP Rs.9,000 with effect from 01.07.2009.
- She was appointed Principal of Christian College, Chengannoor, from 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2016, with extension until 31.03.2019 under Ext.P1 and Ext.P2 orders.
- The UGC Regulations 2018 were notified on 18.07.2018, superseding the 2010 Regulations.
- Regulation 4.1.V.B.(ii) mandates that upon completion of a Principal’s term, the incumbent shall rejoin the parent institution as Professor with AGP Rs.10,000.
- The State Government issued Ext.P4 (29.06.2019) and Ext.P6 (29.09.2019), which stated that Principals revert to their original academic posts with pay fixed at the pre-Principal level.
- Ext.P6, Clause 5 and 6, explicitly stated that State Government Orders override UGC Regulations in case of inconsistency.
- On 01.04.2019, Dr. Alex rejoined the English Department as Associate Professor, but sought redesignation as Professor.
- The Deputy Director of Collegiate Education, Kottayam (Respondent 3), rejected her pay fixation proposal via Ext.P7 dated 14.02.2020, directing reversion to Associate Professor pay.
- Dr. Alex filed Ext.P8 appeal on 18.05.2020, which remained pending.
- She retired on 31.03.2020, and her pension was sanctioned based on Associate Professor’s last pay, with conditional acceptance pending resolution of her appeal.
Procedural History
- 18.07.2018: UGC Regulations 2018 notified in the Gazette.
- 29.06.2019: Ext.P4 issued by State Government adopting 7th CPC pay scales for higher education.
- 29.09.2019: Ext.P6 issued, declaring State Orders override UGC Regulations in case of conflict.
- 14.02.2020: Ext.P7 issued by Deputy Director rejecting Professor pay fixation.
- 18.05.2020: Ext.P8 appeal filed by petitioner before Director of Collegiate Education.
- 31.03.2020: Petitioner retired.
- 09.04.2024: Counter affidavit filed by Respondent 3.
- 24.04.2024: Counter affidavit filed by 4th respondent supporting petitioner.
- 14.05.2024: Petitioner’s reply affidavit filed.
- 22.05.2024: Counter affidavit filed by University of Kerala.
- 21.06.2024: Writ Petition (WP(C) No.9523/2024) allowed by Single Judge, directing Professor designation and pay fixation.
- 08.04.2026: Writ Appeal (WA No.1831/2025) dismissed by Division Bench.
The Parties' Positions
For the Petitioner (Dr. Achamma Alex)
- Argued that Regulation 4.1.V.B.(ii) of UGC Regulations 2018 is mandatory and forms part of the statutory framework for higher education standards.
- Contended that the UGC Act, 1956, falls under Entry 66 of List I (Union List), making its regulations paramount over State service rules.
- Cited Gambhirdan K Gadhvi v. State of Gujarat, Premachandran Keezhoth v. Chancellor Kannur University, and Radhakrishnan Pillai v. Travancore Devaswom Board to establish that UGC Regulations prevail.
- Asserted that pay fixation under Level 14 (AGP Rs.10,000) is automatic upon completion of Principal’s term, not contingent on promotion.
For the Respondents (State of Kerala, Director, Deputy Director)
- Argued that Ext.P4 and Ext.P6 are valid State service orders under Kerala Service Rules, particularly Rules 28, 33, and 37.
- Contended that reversion to original post is a standard service condition, and pay must be fixed at the pre-Principal level.
- Relied on Jagdish Prasad Sharma v. State of Bihar and Council of Principals of Colleges v. State of Kerala to assert State autonomy over service conditions.
- Claimed that UGC Regulations prescribe minimum qualifications, not automatic pay upgrades upon reversion.
Relief Sought
The petitioner sought:
- Declaration that UGC Regulations 2018 prevail over Ext.P4 and Ext.P6.
- Mandamus directing designation as Professor with effect from 01.04.2019.
- Fixation of pay in Academic Level 14 (AGP Rs.10,000), Pay Band Rs.37,400 - 67,000, with effect from 01.04.2019.
- Revision of pensionary benefits based on Professor’s last pay, including arrears and interest.
The Legal Issue
The central question was whether Regulation 4.1.V.B.(ii) of the UGC Regulations 2018, mandating reversion to the post of Professor upon completion of a Principal’s term, prevails over conflicting State Government Orders Ext.P4 and Ext.P6, which restrict reversion to the pre-Principal academic post and pay scale.
Arguments Presented
For the Appellant/Petitioner
The petitioner relied on the constitutional hierarchy under Entry 66 of List I (Union List), which vests Parliament with exclusive power to determine standards in higher education institutions. She argued that the UGC Regulations are not mere guidelines but statutory instruments under the UGC Act, 1956, and that their provisions on appointment and reversion are integral to maintaining academic standards. Citing State of T.N. v. Adhiyaman Educational & Research Institute and Aleyamma Kuruvila v. Mahatma Gandhi University, she emphasized that any State order conflicting with UGC Regulations is void under Article 246 of the Constitution. She further contended that Regulation 4.1.V.B.(ii) is self-executing and does not require separate promotion; reversion to Professor is automatic upon term completion.
For the Respondent/State
The State contended that service conditions, including pay fixation upon reversion, fall within the domain of State legislation under Entry 25 of List III. It argued that Ext.P4 and Ext.P6 were issued to implement the 7th Central Pay Commission and were necessary for uniformity in pay structures. The State relied on Jagdish Prasad Sharma to assert that conditions like reversion and pay fixation are service matters within State competence, and that UGC Regulations only prescribe minimum qualifications, not automatic pay upgrades. It further argued that the petitioner’s entitlement to Professor designation was subject to approval by the University, which had not yet been granted.
The Court's Analysis
The Division Bench undertook a detailed analysis of the constitutional distribution of powers under the Seventh Schedule. It held that Entry 66 of List I grants Parliament exclusive authority over the coordination and determination of standards in institutions of higher education. The UGC Regulations 2018, framed under the UGC Act, 1956, are therefore not subordinate to State service rules but form part of the statutory framework governing academic appointments.
"The power of the State Government to legislate in the field of education under Entry 25 of List III is subject to the power of the Union Government to legislate on co-ordination and determination of standards in institutions for higher education under Entry 66 of List I."
The Court rejected the State’s reliance on Jagdish Prasad Sharma and Council of Principals of Colleges, distinguishing those cases as relating to superannuation age - a service condition distinct from appointment standards. It emphasized that Regulation 4.1.V.B.(ii) is not a mere recommendation but a mandatory provision tied to the structural integrity of academic hierarchy. The Court noted that the UGC Regulations explicitly define the academic level (Level 14) and grade pay (Rs.10,000) for Principals and Professors, and that reversion to Professor is not contingent on promotion but is a direct consequence of completing the Principal’s term.
The Court further held that Clause 5 and Clause 6 of Ext.P6, which purport to override UGC Regulations, are ultra vires to the extent they conflict with the UGC Act and its Regulations. The principle of federal supremacy under Article 246 renders such State orders invalid where they directly contradict Union legislation. The Court affirmed the Single Judge’s conclusion that the petitioner’s entitlement to Professor designation and pay is automatic and non-discretionary.
The Verdict
The writ appeal was dismissed. The Court upheld the judgment dated 21.06.2024 and directed the State of Kerala and its officials to:
- Designate Dr. Achamma Alex as Professor with effect from 01.04.2019.
- Fix her pay in Academic Level 14 (Pay Band Rs.37,400 - 67,000) with Aggregate Grade Pay of Rs.10,000 from 01.04.2019.
- Calculate and disburse arrears of salary from 01.04.2019 to 31.03.2020.
- Revise her pensionary benefits based on the Professor’s last pay, including arrears.
- Complete all payments within four months from the date of the judgment.
What This Means For Similar Cases
UGC Regulations Override State Pay Orders
- Practitioners must now treat UGC Regulations 2018 as binding on all aided and unaided colleges in Kerala, even where State orders conflict.
- Any State order attempting to restrict automatic reversion to Professor upon Principal’s term completion is legally untenable.
Automatic Designation, Not Promotion
- Reversion to Professor under Regulation 4.1.V.B.(ii) is not a promotion requiring departmental approval - it is a statutory right triggered by term completion.
- Institutions cannot delay or condition this entitlement on internal promotions or administrative clearance.
Pension and Arrears Must Be Revised
- Pension calculations based on lower pay scales (e.g., Associate Professor) for individuals who completed Principal’s term are invalid.
- Arrears of salary and pension must be recalculated from the date of reversion (01.04.2019) and paid within the court-mandated timeline.
Federal Supremacy in Education Standards
- This judgment reinforces that standards for academic appointments, including pay scales and designations, are exclusively within the Union’s domain under Entry 66.
- State governments may supplement but cannot dilute or override UGC Regulations.
Practical Takeaways for Institutions
- Review all pending cases of Principals who completed terms between 18.07.2018 and 31.03.2020.
- Initiate immediate pay revision and pension recalculations for affected staff.
- Cease reliance on Ext.P4 and Ext.P6 for pay fixation upon reversion.
