JUDGMENT 1. - at joint request, since all the (12) petitions involve common issue, were finally heard together and are being disposed of by this order. 2. Management Committee of College Institution, Ajmer ('petitioner- Institution') has filed these petitions assailing common order dated 19.10.2005 whereby Rajasthan Non-Govt. Educational Institutions Tribunal, Jaipur ("Tribunal') has allowed applications filed by its Teachers (respondents) under Section 21 of Rajasthan Non-Govt. Educational Institutions Act, 1989 ('Act, 1989') and consequently directed petitioner-Institution to pay arrears accrued as a result of grant of UGC pay scales for the period from 1.1.1996 to 31.12.2001 to respondent-teachers. 3. All the respondents are working as College Teachers in petitioner- Institution which being recognised and aided educational institution, receiving 90% grant-in-aid under Rajasthan Non-Govt. Educational Institutions (Recognition, Grand-in-aid and Service Conditions etc.) Rules, 1993 ('Rules, 1993'); and is affiliated with Mahrishi Dayanand Sarswati University, Jaipur and Rajasthan Agriculture University, Bikaner. 4. In exercise of powers under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, State Government framed Rajasthan Civil Service (Revised Pay Scales for Government College Teachers including Librarians and PTIs) Rules, 1999 (Rules, 1999') - after promulgation whereof, order (Ann.R.1/2) was issued by State Government on 3.7.1999 to the effect that scales of pay to teaching staff of Non- Govt. Educational Institutions shall be revised as per UGC scales admissible to teachers of the Government Colleges in accordance with Rules, 1999 - in continuation where of, further orders were issued on 13.9.2000 (Ann.R.⅓) enclosing therewith list of Education Institutions and as also date of fixation programme - wherein present petitioner institution stands at S.No. 19 - in pursuance whereof, pay of College Teachers of petitioner-institution was fixed under Rules, 1999 in pay scale of Rs. 8,000-13,500/- with effect from 1.1.1996. 1 low ever, arrears of their salary as a result of revision of pay under UGC Scale from 1.1.1996 to 31.12.2001 were not paid and actual payment was made with effect from 1.1.2002 in view of order dated 5.2.2002 (Ann.3) of State Government. 5. 8,000-13,500/- with effect from 1.1.1996. 1 low ever, arrears of their salary as a result of revision of pay under UGC Scale from 1.1.1996 to 31.12.2001 were not paid and actual payment was made with effect from 1.1.2002 in view of order dated 5.2.2002 (Ann.3) of State Government. 5. Since arrears were not paid in terms of grant-in-aid towards salary of Teachers, representations were made by petitioner Institution, to which the Institutions were informed by State Government vide letter dated 13.5.2003 (Ann.4) that despite their fixation made in UGC revised pay scales with effect from 1.1.1996, the Government has sanctioned grant-in-aid effective from 1.1.2002 and for earlier period (1.1.1996 to 13.12.2001) the Institutions have to arrange from their own funds and since petitioner-Institution failed to pay rather State Government refused to pay arrears, applications were filed by respondents 'Teachers under Section 21 of the Act, 1989 claiming payment of arrears flowing from revision of pay as a result of admissibility of UGC revised pay scales for the period from 1.1.1996 to 31.12.2001. 6. After hearing the parties and examining the issue, the Tribunal recorded finding that there was no justification to deprive the College Teachers of Non-Govt. Educational Institutions, from arrears of pay particularly when the fixation has been made under revised UGC pay scales w.e.f. 1.1.1996 and accordingly directed the petitioner-Institution to pay arrears along with interest vide common order dated 19.10.2005. 7. Petitioner-Institution through its Managing Committee assailed common order of the Tribunal and has not questioned entitlement of their fixation in UGC pay scale from 1.1.1996 but has confined to the submission that once revised pay scales have been made admissible to the Teachers of Non-Govt. Educational aided institutions from 1.1.1996 and petitioner being 90% aided educational institution, the Government is under obligation to pay 90% grant-in- aid towards arrears of pay as claimed by them because such arrears of pay being approved expenditure cannot be denied by State Government. 8. Educational aided institutions from 1.1.1996 and petitioner being 90% aided educational institution, the Government is under obligation to pay 90% grant-in- aid towards arrears of pay as claimed by them because such arrears of pay being approved expenditure cannot be denied by State Government. 8. Counsel for petitioner-Institution submits that under Section 7(1) of the Act, 1989 grant-in-aid cannot be claimed as a matter of right by Non- Government Aided Educational Institutions but State Government cannot refused to pay grant-in-aid arbitrarily particularly when allocated to petitioner institution to the extent of 90%, and according to counsel, once their entitlement to the extent of 90% has been accepted by State Government, it is under obligation to pay its contribution to the extent of 90% of salary which is an approved expenditure in terms of Rule 14 of Rules, 1993 payable to Teachers as a result of their fixation in revised UGC pay scales with effect from 1.1.1996. Counsel submits that once the Tribunal has upheld entitled for payment of arrears also as claimed for, the decision of Government to pay their contribution to the extent of amount of grant-in-aid only (90% in case of petitioner institution) with effect from 1.1.2002 is wholly arbitrary and deserves to be set aside. 9. State Government and so also Teachers have separately filed their reply. But counsel for Teachers has not made any submission obviously for the reason that their entitlement for payment of arrears as a result of fixation as per revised UGC pay scales with effect from 1.1.1996 has not been questioned by petitioner-Institution; and according to them, it is in between State Government and petitioner-Institution to decide; but Teachers once made entitled for their claim in question cannot be at least denied for payment of arrears as allowed by the Tribunal under order impugned. 10. 10. Per contra, in the reply and so also in course of arguments, counsel for respondent State Government submits that grant-in-aid cannot be claimed as a matter of right and once Government took decision to pay arrears from 1.1.2002 and informed the petitioner Institution that for the period prior to 1.1.2002, payment of arrears has to be made by private aided educational institutions from their own funds, it cannot be claimed by petitioner institution and the Government is not bound to sanction grant-in-aid to the extent of 90% in meeting out the arrears in question payable to its Teachers even if they are fixed in UGC revised pay scales w.e.f. 1.1.1996 in view of Section 7(1) of the Act. 11. I have considered contentions of counsel for the parties and with their assistance, examined material on record. Indisputable factual position as it emerges from material on record is that the Teachers of Government Colleges have been fixed in UGC revised pay scales with effect from 1.1.1996 and it has been made applicable to Teachers of Non-Govt. Educational Institutions also from 1.1.1996 and that apart, State Government indisputably had virtually agreed to pay their contribution to the extent of 90% as grant in-aid to them like petitioner institution with effect from 1.1.2002 as is evident from order dated 5.2.2002 (Ann.3) whereby for the period prior thereto (1.1.1996 to 31.12.2001), educational institutions like petitioner have been asked to pay arrears flowing as a result of revision of pay in terms of UGC revised pay scales by arranging through their own funds. 12. Question arises for consideration as to whether State Government is under legal obligation to contribute grant-in-aid to the extent of 90% towards revision of pay fixation made of salary of Teachers working in Non-Govt. Educational Institutions from 1.1.1996. 13. Prior to enforcement of the Act, 1989, service conditions of employees working in aided institutions were being regulated by administrative instruction issued by State Government under Grant-in-Aid Rules, 1963. By passage of time, it was felt necessities to provide for better organisation and development of education in Non-Govt. Educational Institutions that there must be a legislation and accordingly State Government enacted the Act, 1989 which came into force w.e.f. 1.1.1993; and in exercise of powers under Section 43 of the Act, the Rules, 1993 were framed for regulating the recognition grant-in-aid and service conditions etc. of Non-Govt. Educational Institutions. Educational Institutions that there must be a legislation and accordingly State Government enacted the Act, 1989 which came into force w.e.f. 1.1.1993; and in exercise of powers under Section 43 of the Act, the Rules, 1993 were framed for regulating the recognition grant-in-aid and service conditions etc. of Non-Govt. Educational Institutions. The State Government provides grant-in-aid to private educational institutions with a view to ensure smooth running of the institution and so also that the standard of teaching does not suffer due to paucity of funds. It goes without saying that appointment of qualified and efficient teachers is sine qua non for maintaining high standards of teach in any educational institution. 14. Section 7 of the Act, 1989 provides for grant-in-aid, which can be granted to a recognised institutions run by a society registered under the Societies Registration Act on such terms and conditions and the authority competent may sanction and distribute to recognised institutions in accordance with procedure prescribed therein. Rules 10 and 11 of the Rules, 1993 respectively provide for general conditions and procedure for governing grant- in-aid. As regards Salary, indisputably it is an approved expenditure as provided under Rule 14 of the Rules, 1993. 15. Relevant provisions of the Act, 1989 and of Rules, 1993 are reproduced below : "2. Definitions. - In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires : (R) 'Salary' means the aggregate of the emoluments of an employee including dearness allowance or any other allowance or relief for the time being payable to him but does not include compensatory allowance;" Section 7 of the Act, 1989 reads thus - "7. Grant of aid to recognised institutions (1) No aid shall be claimed by an institution as a matter of right. (2) Unrecognized institutions shall not be eligible to receive any aid. (3) Subject to such terms and conditions as may be prescribed the sanctioning authority may sanction and distribute aid to recognised institutions from time to time in accordance with the procedure as may be prescribed. (4) The aid may cover such part of the expenditure of the institution as may be prescribed. (5) No amount out of aid given for salary of the employees of an institution shall be used for any other purpose. (6) The sanctioning authority may stop, reduce or suspend aid on breach of any of the terms and conditions prescribed in this behalf. (5) No amount out of aid given for salary of the employees of an institution shall be used for any other purpose. (6) The sanctioning authority may stop, reduce or suspend aid on breach of any of the terms and conditions prescribed in this behalf. (7) The amount of aid may normally be paid to the Secretary of the managing committee of an institution but in special circumstances and for reasons to be recorded in writing, such amount may be paid to any. person authorised by the Director of education or by any other officer empowered by him in this behalf." Section 16(1) runs as under : "16. Power of the State Government to regulate the terms and conditions of employment (1) The State Government may regulate .the recruitment and conditions of service including conditions relating to qualification, pay, gratuity, insurance, age of retirement, entitlement of leave, conduct and discipline, of persons appointed as employees of aided institutions in the State." Section 29(1) reads below : "29. Pay and allowances of employees.-(1)'The scales of pay and allowances except compensatory allowance with respect to all the employees of an aided institution shall not be less than those prescribed for the staff belonging to similar categories in Government Institutions." Rules 13 and 14 of Rules, 1993 run thus : "13. Assessment of Annual Recurring Grant.-(1) Annual recurring grant will be given on the basis of estimated expenditure of the current year and be subject to adjustment from the grant payable in the next year. (2) Approved expenditure shall be arrived at according to these rules and such other instructions that may be issued from time to time. (3) Institutions shall be categorized under advise of the grant-in-aid Committee and may be allowed grant-in-aid as follows : Category A. 80% of the approved expenditure of B.70% the previous year plus likely C.60% annual increment of staff. D.50% Special Category.-Institutions carrying on the work of education on experimental and pioneering lines in accordance with the criteria laid down by the Department of Education 90%." 14. Approved Expenditure.-Approved expenditure referred to in Rule 14 above, shall relate to the following items only. All the items from (a) to (v) mentioned below will form competent 'A' of the admissible items of the expenditure. Approved Expenditure.-Approved expenditure referred to in Rule 14 above, shall relate to the following items only. All the items from (a) to (v) mentioned below will form competent 'A' of the admissible items of the expenditure. (a) Actual salary and provident fund contribution not exceeding 8.33% in respect of teaching and non-teaching staff." Earlier a question has arisen for consideration before this Court in Sr. Hr. Sec. School v. Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, 2002(3) WLC (Raj.) 586 as to whether State Government is obliged to contribute grant-in- aid for the selection scale provided under Circular dated 25.1.1992. Full Bench of this Court after examining the Scheme of the Act and Rules framed there under finally concluded that State Government is under obligation to pay grant-in-aid in accordance with percentage prescribed to the category in which the institutions arc placed as is evident from observations quoted below : "Under sub-section (1) of Section 7, educational institutions cannot claim grant-in-aid from the Government as a matter of right i.e. to say on an application moved by an NGEI for grant of aid, it is not incumbent on the Government to grant aid to such an institution if reasonable ground exists for not granting aid to such an institution. However, the Government cannot refuse grant arbitrarily or without there being any justifiable reason. In the present case all the petitioners have been allocated grant-in-aid. The question really is whether once the aid is sanctioned, the sanctioning authority has a power to fix it exercising its own discretion or the grant has to be made as provided under sub-sections (3) and (4) of Section 7 of the Act read with the Rules and in the matter of quantum of grant-in-aid no discretion is left with the sanctioning authority. It is an admitted fact that the petitioners are enjoying grant-in-aid from the Government. It is an admitted fact that the petitioners are enjoying grant-in-aid from the Government. From the scheme of the Rules, it appears that the assessment of annual recurring grant would be sanctioned on the basis of the estimated expenditure of the current year, and the institutions shall be categorized under advise of the grant-in-aid Committee and would be allowed grant-in-aid." After taking note of provisions contained in Rule 13(2) of Rules which speaks of approved expenditure to be arrived at and Rule 13(3) which speaks of categorisation of institutions under advise of the grant-in-aid Committee; so also Rule 14(a) which includes actual salary and provident fund contribution in respect of teaching and non-teaching staff apart from other approved expenditure as laid down in Rule 14 and that apart, definition of 'salary' in Section 2(r) of the Act, 1989, Full Bench of this Court observed as under : "Once it is decided by the Government to provide grant-in-aid in accordance with Sections 7(3) and 7(4) of the Act it leaves no room for the sanctioning authority to exercise its discretion to grant or not to grant the aid in regard to the items covered under Sections 7(3) and 7(4) of the Act. Selection scale being salary, once the Government has decided to grant aid to an NGEI, it will form the part of grant-in-aid and thus the State Government in the eventuality of sanctioning the grant, will pay for the same in accordance with the percentage prescribed to the category in which the NGEIs is placed. " 16. In view of Section 29 of the Act, 1.989, Teachers of an aided institution are also entitled for same pay scale as admissible to the staff belonging to similar categories working in Govt. Institutions. Indisputably State Government in terms of Section 16 of the Act, 1989, regulates the pay being part of service conditions. 'Salary' has been defined in Section 2(r) which takes note of aggregate of emoluments of an employee including dearness allowance or any other allowance or relief for the time being payable to him except compensatory allowance. 17. Institutions. Indisputably State Government in terms of Section 16 of the Act, 1989, regulates the pay being part of service conditions. 'Salary' has been defined in Section 2(r) which takes note of aggregate of emoluments of an employee including dearness allowance or any other allowance or relief for the time being payable to him except compensatory allowance. 17. In view of what has been observed by Full Bench of this Court and by virtue of Section 2(r), the extended definition of salary provides for aggregate of emoluments received by Teacher which also includes all allowances except compensatory allowance and also extended to the relief for the time being payable to the teacher. That apart, once employees and Teachers working in aided educational institutions are entitled for extending relief as admissible to the staff working in Government Educational Institutions and once UGC revised pay scales have been made applicable and admissible to Teachers of aided institutions also from 1.1.1996 and such salary being approved expenditure under Rules 13(2) read with 14(a) of Rules, 1993, arrears flowing as a result of pay fixation on application and admissibility of revised UGC pay scale certainly fall within four corners of definition of salary and is an approved expenditure. 18. No doubt, Section 7 provides that no aid can be claimed as a matter of right. However, once State Government as in instant case decided to grant aid under Section 7(3) of the Act, the sanctioning authority is under a legal obligation to sanction and distribute to a recognised institution the aid from time to time in accordance with procedure as prescribed therein. Further Section 7(4) provides that the aid may cover such part of expenditure of the institution as prescribed therein. A conjoint reading of Section 7(3) with Section 7(4) makes it explicit that the aid to be granted to a recognised institution shall cover estimated expenditure of current year and the approved expenditure as provided under Rule 14 of the Rules, 1993. In my considered opinion, once State Government decided to provide grant-in-aid by virtue of Sections 7(3) and 7(4), it casts legal obligation upon State Government to grant aid in respect of items covered therein at least its share to the extent of 90% grant-in-aid being released and the same can he withheld only in terms of Section 7(6) of the Act, which is not the case of respondent State. 19. 19. In instant case, only difficulty which State Government has raised is paucity of funds as is evident from its letter dated 5.2.2002 (Ann.3) when it took decision to make payment of aid to the aided institutions from 1.1.2002 and not from the date from which fixations were made in UGC revised pay scale from 1.1.1996. 20. In my considered opinion, in view of the Scheme of the Act and so also decision of this Court (Full Bench) (supra), State Government cannot refuse grant-in-aid as claimed for by petitioner institution in an arbitrary manner and once the Committee has decided to pay 90% aid to aided institution (petitioner) as provided under Sections 7(3) and 7(4) of the Act, 1989, it is not vested with sanctioning authority to refuse the aid in facts of instant case. As regards financial burden upon State Government, as is the case of respondent State, it is responsibility of the State to ensure proper education to students and it is for the administration to find out ways and means to secure funds for the purpose but they cannot deprive rightful claim of educational institutions, which has been approved by State Government, itself for the purpose of aid - in pursuance whereof grant-in-aid has been sanctioned as provided under Rule 13 of Rules, 1993 in relation to approved expenditure to which educational institutions are entitled for. But while accepting the plea raised by the petitioner. I find no justification to award interest to the teachers as directed by the Tribunal. 21. Consequently, these (12) writ petitions succeed and are hereby allowed. Accordingly, the order dated 5.2.2002 (Ann.3) of State Government sanctioning grant-in-aid effective from 1.1.2002 to petitioner Institution towards arrears accrued on fixation made in UGC revised pay scales is set aside holding that it will be effective from 1.1.1996. 21. Consequently, these (12) writ petitions succeed and are hereby allowed. Accordingly, the order dated 5.2.2002 (Ann.3) of State Government sanctioning grant-in-aid effective from 1.1.2002 to petitioner Institution towards arrears accrued on fixation made in UGC revised pay scales is set aside holding that it will be effective from 1.1.1996. Respondent-State Government is directed to release its contribution within two months to the extent of 90% in regard to arrears of salary and pay to which Teachers of petitioners-Institution are entitled for from 1.1.1996 to 31.12.2001 under the Scheme of Act and Rules framed therein, in pursuance of common order dated 19.10.2005 of the Tribunal - for compliance whereof, the petitioner-Institution is further directed to pay arrears in full to each of Teachers (respondents herein) within one month thereafter, accrued as a result of application of UGC revised pay scales for the period (supra) in question but that will not carry interest as awarded by the Tribunal. To the above extent, common order dated 19.10.2005 of the Tribunal stands modified. All exercise to comply with the aforesaid directions by State Government and petitioner Institution he made within three months from today. No order as to costs.Writ petition allowed. *******