Authority: Supreme Court of India

Order Date: 10 August 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Dr. Harish Chandra Tiwari (Appellant) vs. Union of India & others, including Uttarakhand Sanskrit University (Respondent No. 7).
  • Nature of proceedings: Civil appeal (No. OF 2026) arising out of Special Leave Petition (SLP) No. 22417 of 2024, which challenged the High Court of Uttarakhand’s order dated 03 Oct 2018 and subsequent order dated 27 Dec 2018.
  • Background:
  • MHRD issued guidelines on 31 Dec 2008 (Letter No. 1‑32/2006‑U.II/U.I(ii)) stating that the post of Associate Professor shall be in Pay Band Rs 37,400‑67,000 with Academic Grade Pay (AGP) of Rs 9,000.
  • UGC adopted these guidelines through its Regulations dated 30 Jun 2010.
  • Uttarakhand Sanskrit University advertised the Associate Professor post on 22 Apr 2015 (Advertisement No. 01/2015) specifying the revised pay band Rs 37,400‑67,000 with AGP Rs 9,000.
  • Dr. Tiwari was appointed on 29 Aug 2016, but the appointment letter incorrectly prescribed the pre‑revised pay scale Rs 15,600‑39,100 with Grade Pay Rs 8,000.
  • The appellant sought the revised pay scale; the university sought clarification from the State Government, which on 27 Dec 2018 directed that the revised pay be given with effect from that date.
  • The appellant filed Writ Petition No. 67/2021 in the Uttarakhand High Court, which dismissed his claim, holding the advertisement contained a typographical error and that the 27 Jun 2011 Government Order fixing the lower pay scale prevailed.
  • High Court’s reasoning: Relied on the university’s counter‑affidavit, treated the advertised pay scale as a mistake, and upheld the 2011 Government Order.
  • Supreme Court’s analysis:

1. Re‑affirmed that MHRD guidelines and UGC Regulations unequivocally prescribe the revised pay band and AGP for directly recruited Associate Professors.

2. Noted that the university itself, in a clarificatory letter dated 09 Jan 2018, acknowledged being bound by UGC regulations and that the revised pay scale was already fixed for Associate Professors in Uttarakhand universities.

3. Emphasised the principle of parity – similarly situated teachers in other state universities were already receiving the revised pay.

4. Rejected the university’s claim of a typographical error, stating that once a regulation‑consistent pay scale is advertised, it cannot be later repudiated.

5. Concluded that the appellant was entitled to the revised pay from the date of his appointment (15 Sep 2016), as the appointment occurred after the MHRD guidelines and UGC regulations came into force.

Final Outcome

  • The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s order.
  • Declared Dr. Tiwari entitled to the revised pay band Rs 37,400‑67,000 with AGP Rs 9,000 from 15 Sep 2016.
  • Directed Uttarakhand Sanskrit University to calculate and release the arrears of salary arising from the differential pay within six weeks of the order.
  • The appeal is allowed; pending applications, if any, stand disposed of; no order as to costs.

Topics: Pay Scale Revision, Judicial Review of University Employment