# Dr. Sheo Kumar v. State of U.P. & Ors

- **Citation:** (2024) 1 ILRA 647
- **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
- **Decided:** 2023-12-22
- **Case number:** Writ-A No. 17887 of 2022
- **Bench:** Ajit Kumar
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/dr-sheo-kumar-v-state-of-u-p-ors-50939
- **Pages:** 16

## Headnote

C.S.C., Sri Avanish Mishra, Sri Gaurav Pundir, Sri
Hritudhwaj Pratap Sahi, Sri M.N. Singh, Sri
Sanjay Kumar Om

Equivalence of Experience for Additional
Professor and Professor - The petitioner, Dr.
Sheo Kumar, challenged the cancellation of his
selection as Principal (Allopathy) by the U.P.
Public Service Commission (UPPSC) for lacking
requisite experience as a Professor - Held, the
experience
of
an
Additional
Professor
is
equivalent to that of a Professor for the post of
Principal, as clarified by the St. Government and
supported by Medical Council of India (MCI) and
National Medical Commission (NMC) guidelines,
which equate the academic qualifications and
teaching duties of both posts. (Paras 7, 13, 14,
21, 24)

Validity of St. Government Clarifications -
The St. Government's letters dated 10.01.2022
and 30.05.2022, clarifying that the experience
of an Additional Professor counts as Professor
experience, were issued in response to UPPSC
queries and a court directive - Held, these
clarifications do not amount to changing the
recruitment rules but interpret the experience
requirement in line with MCI/NMC norms, and
thus are legally vali (Paras 7, 16, 24, 29)

UPPSC's Cancellation Order - The UPPSC
cancelled Dr. Sheo Kumar's provisional selection
vide order dated 10.08.2022, citing lack of
requisite Professor experience - Held, the
cancellation order was cryptic, failed to consider
MCI/NMC
guidelines
and
St.
Government
clarifications, and was unsustainable for lacking
reasoned justification. (Paras 7, 8, 30)

Interpretation of Recruitment Rules - The
advertisement required 10 years of teaching
experience
as
Professor/Associate
Professor/Reader, with at least 5 years as
Professor - Held, equating Additional Professor
experience with Professor experience does not
alter the essential qualifications but aligns with
the expert interpretation of MCI/NMC, as the
roles involve identical teaching duties and
academic qualifications. (Paras 5, 7, 13, 21, 24)

Distinction
from
Precedents
on
Qualification Changes - The respondents
relied
on cases like
U.P. Public Service
648 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Commission Vs Alpana and Yogesh Kumar Vs
Govt. of NCT, Delhi to argue that changing
qualifications
post-advertisement
is
impermissible
-
Held,
these
cases
are
distinguishable as they involved missing or nonequivalent qualifications, whereas here, the
clarification on experience is an interpretation
within the existing rules, not a relaxation or
chang(Paras 9, 25-28)

Role of Expert Bodies - The MCI and NMC,
as expert bodies in medical education, have
equated the posts of Professor and Additional
Professor for academic and experience purposes
- Held, courts cannot override such expert
interpretations, and the petitioner's 8 years of
combined experience as Additional Professor
and Professor satisfies the eligibility criteri(Paras
13, 14, 19, 22)

G. Outcome of Writ Petitions - Writ-A No.
17887 of 2022 filed by Dr. Sheo Kumar was
allowed, quashing the UPPSC's cancellation
order, and the Commission was directed to
recommend
his
appointment
as
Principal,
subject to formalities - Writ-A No. 11798 of
2021 filed by Dr. Jitendra Singh Kushwaha,
challenging Dr. Sheo Kumar's selection, was
dismissed - Writ-A No. 4236 of 2022 was
disposed of accordingly. (Para 31)

Writ Disposed Of.

List of Cases cited:

## Text

_Characters 0–39,762 of 54,001. This is a partial read: ask again with offset=39762 for what follows._

1 All. Dr. Sheo Kumar Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
647

15. In the circumstances, the inquiry
leading
to
the
impugned
orders,
is
procedurally flawed and prejudices the
petitioner's rights going to the root of the
matter. The impugned orders passed on the
basis of such an inquiry cannot be
sustained.

16. In the result, this writ petition
succeeds and is allowed. The impugned
order dated 03.03.2021 passed by the
Chairman,
U.P.
Power
Corporation
Limited, Lucknow and the appellate order
dated 27.12.2021 passed by the Board of
Directors, U.P. Power Corporation Limited,
Lucknow are hereby quashed. It will be
open to the respondents to proceed with the
inquiry afresh, if they so elect, from the
stage of issue of the charge-sheet and pass
fresh orders in accordance with law, after
holding a proper inquiry de novo, following
the guidance in this judgment.

17. There shall be no order as to costs.
----------
(2024) 1 ILRA 647
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION
CIVIL SIDE
DATED: ALLAHABAD 22.12.2023

BEFORE

THE HON'BLE AJIT KUMAR, J.

Writ-A No. 17887 of 2022
with
Writ-A Nos. 11798 of 2021 & 4236 of 2022

Dr. Sheo Kumar ...Petitioner
Versus
State of U.P. & Ors. ...Respondents

Counsel for the Petitioner:
Sri Ashok Khare(Sr. Advocate), Sri Kunal Shah,
Sri Suvanshit Kumar Jaiswal, Sri Vipul Raj
Gautam

Counsel for the Respondents:
C.S.C., Sri Avanish Mishra, Sri Gaurav Pundir, Sri
Hritudhwaj Pratap Sahi, Sri M.N. Singh, Sri
Sanjay Kumar Om

Equivalence of Experience for Additional
Professor and Professor - The petitioner, Dr.
Sheo Kumar, challenged the cancellation of his
selection as Principal (Allopathy) by the U.P.
Public Service Commission (UPPSC) for lacking
requisite experience as a Professor - Held, the
experience
of
an
Additional
Professor
is
equivalent to that of a Professor for the post of
Principal, as clarified by the St. Government and
supported by Medical Council of India (MCI) and
National Medical Commission (NMC) guidelines,
which equate the academic qualifications and
teaching duties of both posts. (Paras 7, 13, 14,
21, 24)

Validity of St. Government Clarifications -
The St. Government's letters dated 10.01.2022
and 30.05.2022, clarifying that the experience
of an Additional Professor counts as Professor
experience, were issued in response to UPPSC
queries and a court directive - Held, these
clarifications do not amount to changing the
recruitment rules but interpret the experience
requirement in line with MCI/NMC norms, and
thus are legally vali (Paras 7, 16, 24, 29)

UPPSC's Cancellation Order - The UPPSC
cancelled Dr. Sheo Kumar's provisional selection
vide order dated 10.08.2022, citing lack of
requisite Professor experience - Held, the
cancellation order was cryptic, failed to consider
MCI/NMC
guidelines
and
St.
Government
clarifications, and was unsustainable for lacking
reasoned justification. (Paras 7, 8, 30)

Interpretation of Recruitment Rules - The
advertisement required 10 years of teaching
experience
as
Professor/Associate
Professor/Reader, with at least 5 years as
Professor - Held, equating Additional Professor
experience with Professor experience does not
alter the essential qualifications but aligns with
the expert interpretation of MCI/NMC, as the
roles involve identical teaching duties and
academic qualifications. (Paras 5, 7, 13, 21, 24)

Distinction
from
Precedents
on
Qualification Changes - The respondents
relied
on cases like
U.P. Public Service
648 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Commission Vs Alpana and Yogesh Kumar Vs
Govt. of NCT, Delhi to argue that changing
qualifications
post-advertisement
is
impermissible
-
Held,
these
cases
are
distinguishable as they involved missing or nonequivalent qualifications, whereas here, the
clarification on experience is an interpretation
within the existing rules, not a relaxation or
chang(Paras 9, 25-28)

Role of Expert Bodies - The MCI and NMC,
as expert bodies in medical education, have
equated the posts of Professor and Additional
Professor for academic and experience purposes
- Held, courts cannot override such expert
interpretations, and the petitioner's 8 years of
combined experience as Additional Professor
and Professor satisfies the eligibility criteri(Paras
13, 14, 19, 22)

G. Outcome of Writ Petitions - Writ-A No.
17887 of 2022 filed by Dr. Sheo Kumar was
allowed, quashing the UPPSC's cancellation
order, and the Commission was directed to
recommend
his
appointment
as
Principal,
subject to formalities - Writ-A No. 11798 of
2021 filed by Dr. Jitendra Singh Kushwaha,
challenging Dr. Sheo Kumar's selection, was
dismissed - Writ-A No. 4236 of 2022 was
disposed of accordingly. (Para 31)

Writ Disposed Of.

List of Cases cited:

1. U.P. Public Service Commission U.P. Allahabad
Vs Alpana, (1994) 2 SCC 723

2. Yogesh Kumar Vs Govt. of NCT, Delhi, (2003)
3 SCC 548

3. Bedanga Talukdar Vs Saifudaullah Khan,
(2011) 12 SCC 85

4. Sanjay K. Dixit Vs St. of U.P., (2019) 17 SCC
373

(Delivered by Hon'ble Ajit Kumar, J.)

1. Heard Sri Ashok Khare, learned
Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Kunal
Shah, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri
Sanjay Kumar Om and Sri F.A. Ansari,
learned counsel appearing for Public
Service Commission in respective petitions
and Sri V.K. Singh, learned Senior
Advocate assisted by Sri Kandarp Narayan
and Sri Gaurav Pundir, learned counsel
appearing for Dr. Jitendra Singh Kushwaha
(respondent No.5 in Writ-A No.17887 of
2022 and petitioner in Writ-A No.11798 of
2021).

2. Writ-A No.17887 of 2022 has been
filed by Dr. Sheo Kumar, whose selection has
been cancelled by the Uttar Pradesh Public
Service Commission (hereinafter referred to
as " the Commission") vide its order dated
10.08.2022, which is under challenge,
whereas Writ-A No.11798 of 2021 has been
filed by Dr. Jitendra Singh Kushwaha
questioning the selection of Dr. Sheo Kumar
as Principal (Allopathy) in the Department of
Medical Education on the ground that he did
not possess the requisite experience under the
relevant Recruitment Rules.

3. Writ-A No.17887 of 2022 is being
taken up as a leading petition. The
controversy involved in afore-captioned
petitions is very short; as to whether the
experience as an Additional Professor in a
Medical College would also count as
experience of a Professor, which a
candidate is required to possess to become
Principal of a Medical College under the
relevant Rules.

4. Dr. Sheo Kumar has experience as
an Additional Professor from 01.07.2013 to
30.6.2017 and then as Professor with effect
from 01.07.2017 to 13.07.2020 and then
from 14.07.2020 to 13.05.2021, thus total
period of experience taking the post of
Additional
Professor
and
Professor
together,
Dr.
Sheo
Kumar
has
an
experience of eight years.
1 All. Dr. Sheo Kumar Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
649

5. The post of Principal (Allopathy) in
the Department of Medical Education was
advertised
by
the
Commission
on
22.12.2021 vide advertisement No.3/202021.
For
the
purposes
of
essential
qualifications, it prescribed that a candidate
should possess (i) MD/MS or an equivalent
qualification
recognised
by
Medical
Council of India (hereinafter referred to as
"MCI") and (ii) at least 10 years teaching
experience
as
a
Professor/Associate
Professor/Reader in a recognised Medical
College/Institution, out of which atleast
five years should be as a Professor in a
Department.
These
were
the
basic
qualifications prescribed for.

6. Both the petitioner and respondent
No.5 applied for the post in question and
petitioner came to be selected provisionally
vide notification dated 20.07.2021 issued
by Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
While
the
provisional
selection
was
notified by the Commission, Dr. Jitendra
Singh Kushwaha, the other applicant filed,
a writ petition before this Court questioning
the provisional selection of the petitioner
and prayed for a mandamus that he may be
taken to be selected and be recommended
for appointment. Later, amending the writ
petition, he also challenged the order of the
Chief Secretary, Government of U.P. dated
10.01.2022 whereby a clarification was
made by the State Government that
qualification for the post of Professor and
Additional Professor being the same, the
teaching experience of both Additional
Professor and Professor should be taken to
be as of a Professor and, therefore, Dr.
Sheo Kumar was absolutely eligible for the
post in question.

7. Sri Ashok Khare, learned Senior
Advocate assisted by Sri Kunal Shah,
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner
Dr. Sheo Kumar has submitted that in the
State of U.P. while State Medical Colleges
have 3-tier hierarchical system of teaching
faculty with Assistant Professor, Associate
Professor and Professor, the Institution like
Sanjay Gandhi Postgraduate Institute has 4tier system with the post of Assistant
Professor, Associate Professor, Additional
Professor and Professor. He submits that
though there is little difference in the payscale between the post of Additional
Professor and Professor but for the
purposes of essential qualifications for a
candidate to be appointed as Additional
Professor and Professor is the same,
inasmuch the teaching work/assignment
both for Additional Professor and Professor
is the same. In support of his contention,
learned Senior Advocate has relied upon
the guidelines issued by the National
Medical Commission in which it had come
to be recorded that many institutions have
4-tier faculty designation system while
others have 3-tier faculty designation
system. So the query was where does one
equate as Additional Professor, the answer
by the National Medical Commission was
that Additional Professor is to be equated to
a Professor. Sri Khare submits that the
Medical Council of India (hereinafter
referred to as "MCI") has also prescribed
academic qualifications for the post of
Professor and Additional Professor as
same, according to which one should have
eight years of postgraduate experience and
must possess qualification of MD/MS/DNB
in the concerned subject as per the
regulations. Sri Khare has also taken the
Court to the earlier notification issued by
the Board of Governors of the MCI dated
13.12.2018, which prescribes that as far as
MCI norms are concerned, Professor and
Additional Professor are equivalent. Sri
Khare submits that when confusion arose
as to the experience of the petitioner as a
650 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Professor
for
the
post
of
Principal
(Allopathy), the Commission wrote a letter
dated 27.11.2021 to the State Government
seeking its guideline to the issue, as to
whether experience of a candidate as
Additional Professor would be admissible
as a Professor and the State Government
vide its letter dated 10.01.2022 answered
that in the considered view of the
Government, those Professors working in
Government
Medical
Colleges
and
Additional Professors working in SGPGI
since were discharging similar duties and
their nature of work was the same,
therefore, they could be equated and thus
Dr. Sheo Kumar possessed the requisite
qualification. He further submits that in
writ petition filed by Dr. Jitendra Singh
Kushwaha, this Court vide order dated
08.10.2021 had directed the Director
General, Medical Education and Training,
Uttar Pradesh to take a decision with regard
to the equivalence of qualification, insofar
as it related to the experience on the post of
Additional
Professor/
Professor
in
consultation
with
National
Medical
Commission. In compliance of this Court's
order dated 08.10.2021 corrected on
22.10.2021, a decision was taken by the
State
Government
on
10.01.2022.
However, upon repeated query being made
by the Commission vide its letter dated
28.04.2022, the Government vide order
dated 30.05.2022 reiterated its stand that
since the work and discharge of duties on
the posts of Additional Professor and
Professor were the same, their respective
experiences were logically required to be
equated and thus the experience as an
Additional Professor would count towards
the experience of a Professor. Sri Khare
submits that the order dated 30.05.2022 is
not under challenge and has attained
finality. He further argues that after the
State
Government
took
a
conscious
decision both in the light of the direction
issued by this Court in the writ petition
filed by Dr. Jitendra Singh Kushwaha and
the query made by the Commission in its
letters dated 27.11.2021 and 28.4.2022, it
was not open for the Commission to have
cancelled the selection made in respect of
the petitioner Dr. Sheo Kumar. Sri Khare
also argues that the order passed by the
Commission is quite a cryptic order and
does not deliberate upon the issue involved
in the matter, nor does it discuss the
notifications and resolution of the MCI and
the State Government and, therefore, the
order impugned cannot be sustained in the
eyes of law and deserves to be quashed.

8. Learned counsel appearing for the
Commission Sri Sanjay Kumar Om and Sri
F. A. Ansari appearing in respective
petitions argue that once the post has been
advertised requiring the experience as
Professor, there was no justification to
accept the experience of an Additional
Professor as a Professor. They further argue
that recruitment and selection body is not
empowered
to
change
or
relax
the
qualifications as prescribed for in the
advertisement or in the absence of any
relaxation or equivalence prescribed for in
the advertisement, the recruitment and
selection body cannot on its own accept the
equivalent qualification or otherwise set up
any
definition
to
the
qualification
prescribed for the post. They further argue
that the Professor means Professor and will
not include Additional Professor. They
argue that even in the notifications issued
by the State Government dated 10.01.2022
and
30.5.2022,
it
has
been
very
categorically stated that one should possess
the experience of five years as Professor, so
they argue that there is no dilution of the
essential
qualifications
and
any
interpretation to incorporate within it the
1 All. Dr. Sheo Kumar Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
651
experience of an Additional Professor,
would amount to a legislative act which is
beyond the scope of the authority of the
recruitment and selection body. They
further argue that the petitioner had been
only provisionally selected and, therefore,
his selection was subject to his furnishing
requisite
certificates
of
experience
regarding which he had furnished his
undertaking but failed to do so. In this
connection they have drawn the attention of
the Court to Annexure No.3 to the counter
affidavit filed on behalf of the Commission
to justify that a conscious decision has been
taken by the Commission. They have
defended
the
order
passed
by
the
Commission cancelling the provisional
selection of the petitioner Dr. Sheo Kumar
as Principal (Allopathy) in the Department
of Medical Education, U.P. for the reasons
assigned therein.

9. Sri Vijay Kumar Singh, learned
Senior Advocate assisted by Sri Kandarp
Narayan and Sri Gaurav Pundir, learned
counsel
appearing
for
contesting
respondent
No.5-Dr.
Jitendra
Singh
Kushwaha, has argued that whatever be the
resolutions of the MCI or the guidelines
answering the query being made with
regard to the experience, the Rules provide
for only experience as a Professor and not
as Additional Professor. He submits that
even though the essential qualifications for
recruitment on the post of Professor and
Additional Professor in those colleges,
where they have 3-tier or 4-tier faculty
designation system, is the same but the
legal position stands that the post of
Additional Professor is of a lower cadre
post in terms of pay-scale. He argued that
experience has to be commensurate to the
post and any equation of experience, if
permitted to hold even an Additional
Professor to be eligible to the post of
Principal, would amount to substituting the
qualification originally prescribed under
the Rules. He submits that if it is permitted,
as per the notifications made by the State
Government
without
amending
recruitment/service Rules, it would amount
to changing the eligibility criterion which is
certainly beyond the scope of authority of
the recruitment and selection body. He
argues that this amounts to changing the
eligibility
criterion
altogether
in
contravention to what is prescribed under
the Rules. He submits that legal position
regarding
change
in
qualification
or
eligibility criterion at the end of the
recruitment and selection body is not
permissible. He submits that there could be
a case that many Additional Professor may
not have applied on the ground that they
did not possess the requisite experience as
Professor. He has placed reliance upon the
judgments of the Supreme Court rendered
in
U.P.
Public
Public
Service
Commission U.P. Allahabad and Another
v. Alpana, (1994) 2 SCC 723; Yogesh
Kumar and Others v. Govt. of NCT,
Delhi and Others, (2003) 3 SCC 548;
Bedanga Talikdar v. Saifudaullah Khan
and Others, (2011) 12 SCC 85 and
Sanjay K. Dixit and others and The State
of Uttar Pradesh and Others, (2019) 17
SCC 373.

10. Having heard learned counsel
appearing for respective parties and having
perused the record, in my view, following
questions arise for consideration in these
petitions:

(i) Whether defining the experience of
a Professor by including experience of
Additional Professor would amount to
encroaching upon the Rule making power
and
thereby
changing
the
essential
qualification prescribed for under the
652 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
relevant
Rules
and,
therefore,
the
Commission was justified in cancelling the
provisional selection or conversely, the
clarification made as to the experience by
the State Government vide letters dated
10.01.2022 and 30.05.2022 was to answer
the query and remove the confusion, if
created superficially and, therefore, would
not amount to changing qualification,
inasmuch as such a clarification is not a
faulty one and so the clarification made
under the letters do not suffer from any
illegality and Commission was not justified
in cancelling selection of petitioner.

11. In order to find the answer to the
questions so formulated above, it is
necessary to look into first the essential
qualifications as prescribed under the Rules
and then to test the notifications made by
the State Government and experience for
the post of Professor which is sought to be
defined. There is no doubt that minimum
qualifications for teachers in medical
education institutions are prescribed as per
the regulations framed by the MCI in the
year 1998, which have been amended from
time to time. It prescribes for the post of
Professor/Additional
Professor,
the
following
qualifications
as
essential
qualification :

Posts
Academic
Qualification
Teaching
&
Research
Experience
Professor/
Addl.
Professor
(8
years
of
Post
PG
Experienc
e
A
post
graduate
qualification
MD/MS
in
the concerned
subject and as
per the TEQ
Regulation
Associate Professor in
the subject for 3 years in
a permitted/ approved/
recognized
medical
college/ institution with 4
Research Publications in
Indexed
Journal
on
Cumulative basis with
minimum of 2 Research
Publication during the
tenure
of
Associate
Professor as Ist Author or
as corresponding author.

12. From the perusal of the above, it
is clear that as far as the post of Additional
Professor and Professor are concerned,
academic qualifications have been kept at
par. For the post of Principal/Dean/Director
of
Medical
Colleges,
following
qualifications have been prescribed for:

Post
Academic
Qualifications
Teaching/Resea
rch Experience
Principal/
Dean/Dir
ector
of
Medical
Institution
Should possess the
recognised
postgraduate medical
qualification
and
other
academic
qualification from a
recognized institution
with a minimum of
ten years' teaching
experience
as
Professor/Associate
Professor/Reader in a
medical college/Instt.
Out of which atleast
five years should be
as Professor in a
department.
Preference for these
appointments may be
given to the Heads of
the Departments.

13. The Board of Governors in
supersession of MCI, while being queried
upon, made a reply vide letter 13.12.2018
that the academic qualification and the
teaching and research experience for the
post of Professor and Additional Professor
have been kept the same, so as per the MCI
they are equivalent but it was left open for
the concerned appointing authority to
prescribe higher norms than what was
prescribed
under
the
Minimum
Qualification for Teachers Regulations
1998. The reply made to the query is
reproduced herein as under:

"This is with reference to your email
dated
11.12.2018
and
order
dated
1 All. Dr. Sheo Kumar Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
653
11.12.2018 passed by the Hon'ble High
Court in the above captioned matter. In this
regard I am directed to inform you that as
regards the qualification and experience
prescribed for appointment Professor/Addl.
Professor in Broad Specialities [MD/MS]
in Minimum Qualification for Teachers
Regulations 1998 is as under:

Posts
Academic
Qualification
Teaching & Research
Experience
Professor/A
ddl.
Professor (8
year of Post
PG
Experience)
A post graduate
qualification
MD/MS in the
concerned
subject and as
per the TEQ
Regulation
Associate
Professor
in the subject for 3
years
in
permitted/approved/r
ecognized
medical
college/institution
with
4
Research
Publications
in
Indexed Journal on
Cumulative
basis
with minimum of 2
Research Publication
during the tenure of
Associate
Professor
as 1st Author or as
corresponding author.

The above position has been notified
in Minimum Qualification for Teachers
Regulations, 1998 on 05.06.2017 & again
01.11.2018 copy enclosed.

Therefore in so far as MCI norms are
concerned Professor/Add. Professor are
equivalent.
However,
it
is
for
the
concerned appointing authority to lay
down/prescribe norms higher than that
prescribed in Minimum Qualification for
Teachers Regulations, 1998.

This issues with the approval of
Secretary General, Board of Governors."

The National Medical Commission
(NMC) also published the answer to the
queries made from time to time for the
academic year 2021-22. The NMC also
made a specific reply to such query vide its
clause 11, which reads as under :

"Many Institutions follow a 4-tier
faculty
designation
system
-Assistant
Professor, Associate Professor, Additional
Professor and Professor. For the purposes
of our assessment, which has only 3 levels,
where does one equate the Additional
Professor?

Additional Professor is to be equated
to a Professor."

(Emphasis added)

14. It is also interesting to notice here that
Board of Governors also reiterated the
academic qualification and teaching &
research experience for the post of
Professor and Additional Professor to be
the same, which is reproduced herein as
under:

"BOARD OF GOVERNORS

IN SUPERSESSION OF MEDICAL
COUNCIL OF INDIA

NOTIFICATION

New Delhi, the 12th February, 2020

No.
MCI-12(2)/2019Med.Misc./189334.- In exercise of powers
conferred by Section 33 of the Indian
Medical Council Act, 1956 (102) of 1956),
in Supersession of the Medical Council of
India with the previous sanction of the
Central Government hereby makes the
following Regulations to further amend the
"Minimum Qualifications for Teachers in
Medical Institutions Regulations 1998,
namely:-

1. (i) These regulations may be called
the "Minimum Qualifications for Teachers
in
Medical
Institutions
(Amendment)
Regulations, 2019".

(ii) They shall come into force from the
date of their publication in the Official
Gazette.

2. In the "Minimum Qualifications for
Teachers
in
Medical
Institutions
654 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
Regulations, 1998 in Schedule 1 cluase 6
as
amended
vide
notification
dated
01.11.2018, shall be substituted with the
following:-

"The Teachers in a medical college or
institutions having a total of 8 years
teaching experience out of which at least 4
years teaching experience as Assistant
Professor
with
atleast
one
research
publication
in
indexed
journals
(as
indicated in table) gained after obtaining
postgraduate degree shall be recognized as
post
graduate
teacher
in
broad
specialilities.

In case of super specialities only those
teachers who possess 5 years teaching
experience out of which at least 2 years
teaching experience as Assistant Professor
gained after obtaining the higher speciality
degree shall be recognized as post graduate
teacher.

I. Broad Specialities (MD/MS/DNB)

Posts
Academic
Qualification
Teaching & Research
Exp.
Professor/A
ddl.
Professor (8
years
of
Post
PG
Experience)
A
post
graduate
qualification
MD/MS/
DNB in the
concerned
subject and as
per
these
Regulations
(i) Associate Professor
in the subject for 3
years
in
a
permitted/approved/rec
ogni-zed
medical
college/institution with
three
Research
publications
(atleast
two
as
Associate
Professor)
(only
original papers, metaanalysys,
systematic
reviews, and case series
that are published in
journals
included
in
Medline,
Pubmed
Central, Citation index,
Sciences
Citation
index,
Expanded
Embase,
Scopus,
Directory
of
Open
access journals (DoAJ)
will
be
considered).
The author must be
amongst first three or
should
be
the
Corresponding author.

(ii)
Should
have
completed the Basic
course
in
Medical
Education Technology
from
Institution(s)
designated by MCI.

(iii)
Should
have
completed the Basic
course in biomedical
research
from
Institution(s)
designated by MCI.

Further provided that
for the transitory period
of 2 years w.e.f. the
date of this notification,
the
appointment/
promotion to the post
of Professor can be
made by the institution
in accordance with the
"Minimum
Qualifications
for
Teachers in Medical
Institutions
Regulations, 1998" as
prevailing
before
issuance
of
this
notification.

15. The essential qualifications that
have been prescribed for, by the MCI in its
Regulations have been adopted by the State
Government and the same qualifications in
terms of academic qualification have been
prescribed for, under the advertisement in
question
for
the
post
of
Principal
(Allopathy) in the Department of Medical
Education. The relevant part of the
advertisement that contains the post and
educational
qualifications
etc.
is
reproduced as under:
1 All. Dr. Sheo Kumar Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
655

"Medical
Education
Deptt.
U.P.
(Allopathy)

01 (One) Post of Principal (Allopathy)
(General Recruitment), Deptt.No.(S-8/60),
Nature
of
post-Gazetted/Temporary,
Reservation-
Unreserved/Pay
Scale-Rs.
Academic
Level
14,
Initial
Pay
Rs.1,44,200/-.

Essential
Qualification:-
(i)
M.D./M.S. or an equivalent qualification
recognized by Medical Council of India, (ii)
atleast 10 years Teaching experience as
professor/Associate Professor/Reader in a
recognized Medical College/Institution out
of which atleast five years should be as a
Professor in a department. Preferential
qualification:-
Reference
for
these
appointments may be given to the heads of
the department in a medical college or as
head in Medical Institution. Age Limit-
Minimum 50 years and maximum 62 years.
No Private Practice is permissible but an
allowance will be given in lieu thereof as
per government orders. Selected candidates
can be appointed/ transferred in public
interest in any of the Govt. Medical
Colleges
of
U.P.
Note
:-
Essential
qualification is required to be recognized
by MCI otherwise candidature will not be
considered."

16. Relying upon the qualifications
prescribed for the post of Professor and
Additional Professor, the State Government
came to reply the query made by the
Commission and also in compliance of the
order of this Court passed in Writ-A
No.11798 of 2021 that for the purposes of
experience, the experience gained as
Additional Professor in SGPGI and as a
Professor there or in any other medical
college deserved to be equated and so also
logically as the discharge of duty and the
work and/or assignment in the field of
teaching are the same.

17. Testing the argument of Sri Khare
that this act of defining the experience for
the purposes of eligibility would not
amount to 'changing the qualifications
prescribed
for
under
the
Rules'
or
eligibility criterion otherwise, a legal plea
advanced by learned counsel appearing for
the respondents, I find that the experience
as a Professor deserved scrutiny from the
point
of view
of
the
qualifications
prescribed by the MCI and clarificatory
notifications/letters issued by it. While it is
true that the Rules provide for requisite
number of years of experience as Professor,
in some department there is 4- tier system
whereas
in
the
large
number
of
departments/institutions/universities
there
is 3- tier system faculty.

18. What can be a better Institution to
All India Institute of Medical Sciences in
the field of medical education setting up
example, norms and quality of teaching and
producing doctors in various disciplines
and these norms as set by the AIIMS have
been followed by adoption in various
regional institutes of medical education like
Postgraduate Institute of Medical Science
at Lucknow, U.P. There is a circular letter
issued by the SGPGI, Lucknow on
27.01.2012 that says that the new career
progression scheme in respect of faculty
members at par in AIIMS, New Delhi is
hereby
implemented
in
Institute
in
accordance with the orders issued by
Government of India, Ministry of Health &
Family Welfare dated 12.01.2010. It
records that Government of Uttar Pradesh
vide its letter dated 01.02.2011 has also
accorded approval for the same. This letter
prescribes for pay scale of both the
Additional Professor and Professor under
Pay Band-4 (Rs.37,400 - Rs.67,000/-) with
a difference of Rs.1000/- in grade pay, as
the grade pay of Additional Professor
656 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
would be Rs.9,500/- but Rs.10,500/- in case
of
Professor.
In
between
Associate
Professor and Professor, there is a post
described as Additional Professor. In
SGPGI, a Professor is required to have four
years
experience
as
an
Additional
Professor. This is a career advancement
scheme with a difference of grade pay only
and not the pay scale. The circular dated
27.01.2012 is reproduced herein as under:

"No.6911/PGI/DIR/DC/2012

Dated 27th January, 2012

OFFICE ORDER

In
continuation
to
Office
Order
No.6129/DIR/PGI/ER/-Acad/3090/2010
dated
6 October
2010,
New
Career
Progression Scheme in respect of faculty
members at par with AIIMS, New Delhi is
hereby implemented in the Institute in
accordance with orders issued by the
Government of India, Ministry of Health &
Family
Welfare
vide
their
letter
No.V.16020/57/2008-ME-1 dated 12.01.2010
and as per provisions of First Regulations,
2011 of the Institute. The Government of
Uttar Pradesh vide their letter No.4090/71-211-42/2009 Dated 1st February, 2011 has
also accorded approval for the same.

The following provisions have been
made by the Government of India for
revision of pay scales/Career Progression
Scheme for faculty (teaching staff) of
AIIMS, New Delhi vide their order No.
V.16020/57/2008-ME-1 dated 12.01.2010:

I. Assistant Professor (Entry Grade):

To be placed in Pay Band-3 (Rs.
15600-39100); minimum Pay to be fixed at
Rs.30000/- with Academic Grade Pay of
Rs.8000/-. After three years, Assistant
Professors will move to Pay Band-4
(Rs.37400-67000/-) with Academic Grade
Pay of Rs.8700/-.

The eligibility criteria for appointment
as Assistant Professor (Medical & Nonmedical) will be the same as prescribed by
the Government of India, Ministry of
Health & Family Welfare vide their letter
No.
V.16020/57/2008-ME-1
dated
12.01.2010.

II. Associate Professor:

To be placed Pay Band-4 (Rs.3740067000) subject to minimum Pay being
Rs.42800/- and Academic Grade Pay of
Rs.9000/-. Assistant Professor with three
years of service will be eligible for
appointment to the post of Associate
Professor subject to clearance of the
prescribed selection process.

III. Additional Professor:

They will be placed Pay Band-4
(Rs.37400-67000) with minimum Pay being
Rs. 46000/- and Academic Grade Pay of
Rs. 9500/-. Associate Professor with three
years of service will be eligible for
appointment to the post of Additional
Professor subject to clearance of the
prescribed selection process.

IV. Professor:

They will be placed in Pay Band-4
(Rs.37400-67000) with the minimum Pay of
Rs.51600/- and Academic Grade Pay of
Rs.10500/-. Additional Professors with four
years of service will be eligible for
appointment to the post of Professor
subject to clearance of the prescribed
selection process.

Upto 40% of posts of Professors will
be operated in new Higher Administrative
Grade (HAG) scale of Rs. 67000-79000/-.
Promotion to this grade will be subject to
clearance of the prescribed selection
process.

The Career Progression Scheme shall
be
implemented
notionally
w.e.f.
01.07.2008 subject to condition that pay
fixation and other financial benefits are not
allowed from a date prior to 31.12.2008 as
1 All. Dr. Sheo Kumar Vs. State of U.P. & Ors.
657
decided by the Government of India,
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare vide
their
letter
No.V.16020/11/2009-ME-1
dated 30.03.2010.

The rest terms and conditions shall be
as per directives issued by the Government
of India, Ministry of Health & Family
Welfare
vide
their
letters
No.V.16020/57/2008-ME-1
dated
12.01.2010 and No.V16020/11/2009-ME-1
dated 30.03.2010.

The above orders are being issued
with the approval of the Department of
Medical Education, Government of Uttar
Pradesh.

Sd. illegible

(PROF. R.K. SHARMA)

DIRECTOR"

19. Recently on 14.02.2022, National
Medical Commission has floated Teachers
Eligibility
Qualifications
in
Medical
Institutions Regulations, 2022. Regulation
6 of the Regulations prescribes for Faculty
Appointment and Promotion, Teaching and
Research Experience and the Academic
Qualifications. This regulation provides for
only
Professor,
Associate
Professor,
Assistant Professor, Senior Resident. Now,
post of Professor being relevant here, the
essential
qualifications
in
terms
of
academic qualifications and the research
experience are reproduced herein as under:

Posts
Academic
Qualifications
Teaching and Research
Experience
Professor
8
year
post
PG
experienc
e
MD/MS/DN
B
in
the
concerned
subject.
i. Associate Professor in
the subject for three years
in a permitted/recognized
medical
college/institution.

ii. Should have at least
four
Research
publications (at least two
as Associate Professor)
[only
original
papers,
meta-analysis, systematic
reviews, and case series
that are published in
journals
indexed
in
Medline,
PubMed,
Central Science Citation
Index, Science Citation
Index,
Expanded
Embase,
Scopus,
Directory of Open Access
Journals (DoAJ) will be
considered].

iii.
Should
have
completed
the
basic
course
in
Mecial
Education
Technology
from
Institutions
designated by NMC.

iv.
Should
have
completed
the
Basic
course
in
Biomedical
Research
from
Institutions designated by
NMC.

20. Thus, for a Professor, a candidate
is required to possess eight years teaching
experience at postgraduate level and three
years teaching experience as an Associate
Professor
in
a
regcognised
medical
college/institution. As per the Medical
Council of India that frames Rules and
Regulations for academic qualifications for
different categories of posts in the field of
medical education, a Professor is required
to possess experience of teaching at
postgraduate level and also having at least
three years as Associate Professor, so
essentially the requirement is that eight
years teaching experience, which would
include teaching experience of Associate
Professor for three years for professor.

21. Now, looking to the circular of the
SGPGI, a person would be getting
promotion as Additional Professor after
658 INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES
three years of service as an Associate
Professor. Meaning thereby, those who are
to be promoted as Additional Professor
shall have to have three years experience of
Associate Professor. Thus, feeding cadre of
the Additional Professor is Associate
Professor. The conclusion, therefore, would
be that Additional Professor is above to the
Associate Professor and since the Medical
Council of India has defined experience of
Professor as including of Additional
Professor and the NMC has equated the
posts,
no
other
body
can
interpret
experience as to qualification otherwise.

22. Both the MCI and NMC therefore,
would be the only authorities to define the
experience and it having defined in its
wisdom the experience of a Professor to
include the experience of an Additional
Professor,
the
essential
qualification/eligibility criterion for the two
posts to be the same, this Court cannot sit
in appeal to take a view contrary to what a
body of experts in the field, has taken.

23. It is not the case of the
respondents that the petitioner did not
possess the eight years teaching experience
at postgraduate level or that the petitioner
had no
experience
as
an Associate
Professor. All that has been questioned is
that his experience of Professor to be
specific five years would not include his
experience as an Additional Professor.

24. The Commission had also selected
the petitioner for the post of Principal
(Allopathy) in the Department of Medical
Education, for the documents of experience
furnished by him. It being not a case of
"walk-in-interview", the applications were
invited to shortlist the candidates on the
basis of documents furnished by them, so
the Commission could have rejected the
candidature of the petitioner on the ground
that the petitioner did not possess the
requisite qualifications but it admitted his
application and the candidature, though
selected him provisionally only subject to
his furnishing the experience certificate
both of Professor and Additional Professor.
While the petitioner could have done
something, the litigation intervened and
this Court also in its order directed the
State Government to take a proper decision.
The State Government, therefore, took a
conscious decision to hold that the post of
Additional Professor and Professor are
equated for the purposes of experience. The
State being the employer has issued
clarifications
and
these
clarifications
cannot said to changing the Rules of
recruitment on the post as to essential
qualification in the midst of selection
process. I do not, therefore, find any good
ground to hold the decision taken by the
State Government to be bad, as it stands in
conformity with the guidelines of the MCI.

25. In view of what I have already
discussed above, the arguments advanced
by learned Senior Counsel appearing for
the contesting respondent and the learned
counsel appearing for the Commission that
the petitioner did not possess the requisite
qualification of teaching experience as a
Professor
cannot
be
accepted.
The
authorities that have been relied upon by
the learned Senior Counsel appearing for
the contesting private respondent in the
case of U.P. Public Service Commission
v. Alpana (supra), is distinguishable on
facts. In that case, for the post of Munsif
Magistrate
as
then
existed,
the
requirements were that a candidate must
possess on the last date fixed for receipt of
applications a "degree of Bachelor of Laws
of a University established by law in Uttar
Pradesh or any other University of India
1 All. Dr. Sheo Kumar Vs. State of U.P.