Srinagar, Oct 15: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Srinagar Bench, has directed the University of Kashmir to consider granting notional effect to Assistant Professor Rifat John’s appointment in the Department of Botany from June 4, 2008, along with consequential service benefits permissible under the rules. However, the Tribunal has ruled out salary and other monetary benefits for the period before she actually joined the post.
The direction came while disposing of Transfer Application No. 109 of 2024 filed by John, who had sought retrospective recognition of her appointment and related service benefits. The university had issued her appointment order on November 1, 2011.
John had applied for the post of Lecturer in Botany in response to an advertisement published on January 14, 2004, and secured the sixth position in the selection list. Her appointment was initially kept pending due to the need to establish the equivalence of her postgraduate qualification.
On June 4, 2008, the University’s Equivalence Committee recognised her M.Sc. Environmental Botany degree from Jamia Hamdard, New Delhi, as equivalent to the M.Sc. Botany qualification required for the post. Despite this decision, her appointment was issued more than three years later.
Challenging the delay, John argued that the qualification-related obstacle had been removed in 2008 and sought the corresponding retrospective service benefits. The university had previously rejected her request for retrospective effect.
During the proceedings, the university’s counsel submitted that her claim could be examined and decided within a specified timeframe, subject to the applicable rules and regulations and the absence of any other legal impediment.
The Tribunal, comprising Judicial Member Justice Ritu Tagore and Administrative Member Prasant Kumar, directed the competent authority to consider granting notional effect to her appointment from June 4, 2008, and determine the consequential benefits admissible under the applicable rules.
The university has been directed to complete the exercise within six weeks and communicate its decision to the applicant.
Clarifying the scope of the relief, the Tribunal stated that John would not receive salary or other monetary emoluments for the period between June 4, 2008, and her actual joining following the appointment order dated November 1, 2011. Applying the principle of “no work, no pay”, the Tribunal restricted the claim to permissible notional service benefits without monetary payment for the period in question.
The Tribunal further directed the university not to rely on its October 21, 2015, communication rejecting her request while reconsidering the matter, provided no other legal or factual impediment prevents the grant of benefits admissible under law.
The application was disposed of without any order on costs.
