Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2004 DIGILAW 92 (UTT)

Daulat Ram Sharma v. State of Uttaranchal

2004-06-24

P.C.VERMA

body2004
JUDGMENT Heard Mr. C.D. Bahuguna, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Nand Prasad, learned Standing Counsel for the State. 2. The petitioner was appointed on 30.8.1973 as Head Master of Janta Madhyamik Vidhyalaya, Kotachami, District Almora, which was a junior high school. The appointment of the petitioner was approved on 23.11.1973. The petitioner was confirmed on the said post of Head Master on 6.7.1974 by the Committee of Management. This institution was upgraded and provincialised from 8.7.1976. As a consequence of up-gradation, the Government issued an order on 26.7.1976 directing that the staff possessing requisite qualification shall be appointed on the sanctioned posts and their salary shall be paid by the Government. A Government order was issued on 26.7.1976, which provided that the salary shall be paid by the State Government and the existing staff at the time of provincialisation, who are having essential qualification, shall be appointed on the sanctioned posts. The Manager of the Janta Madhyamik Vidhyalaya Kotachami, Almora also issued a certificate of "Teaching Experience" to the petitioner on 8.7.1976 with an idea that on the basis of that certificate could get his legitimate right to the post of L.T. Grade and to draw L.T. pay scale after provincialisation of the recognised institution. There is no dispute that the petitioner was receiving salary in L.T. Grade from 30.8.1973 upto 7.7.1976. The Deputy Director of Education appointed the petitioner in C.T. Grade instead of L.T. Grade though the petitioner possessed the requisite qualification to be appointed in L.T. Grade. According to the petitioner, the Deputy Director of Education committed mistake in appointing the petitioner in C.T. Grade as he was entitled for appointment in L.T. Grade and was also the senior most teacher at the time of provincialisation of the Institution. 3. No counter affidavit has been filed in this case till date. Learned counsel for the petitioner urged that he was entitled for L.T. Grade pay scale w.e.f.8.7.1976. 4. The Government Order dated 26.7.1976 was absolutely clear that all teachers or employees who are working in the institution and possess the requisite qualification were to be appointed by the respondents as per their qualification. It is not denied that the petitioner was possessing requisite qualification to be appointed as L.T. Grade teacher and further the petitioner was in the pay scale of L.T. Grade teacher prior to provincialisation of the institution. It is not denied that the petitioner was possessing requisite qualification to be appointed as L.T. Grade teacher and further the petitioner was in the pay scale of L.T. Grade teacher prior to provincialisation of the institution. Therefore, the Deputy Director of Education acted illegally in appointing the petitioner in C.T. Grade as the petitioner was entitled to be appointed as L.T. Grade teacher w.e.f. 8.7.1976. 5. In the result, the writ petition succeeds and is allowed. A direction is issued to the respondents to treat the petitioner in L.T. Grade w.e.f. 8.7.1976 and pay arrears of salary to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of production of certified copy of this order before them. 6. The petitioner shall be entitled to his costs.