Research › Search › Judgment

Gauhati High Court · body

2015 DIGILAW 511 (GAU)

Lalhmingliana v. State of Mizoram

2015-05-01

M.R.PATHAK

body2015
JUDGMENT AND ORDER (CAV) M.R. Pathak, J. - Heard Mr. Nelson Sailo, learned Sr. Counsel, assisted by Mrs. Dinari T. Azyu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. Also heard Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl & Ms. Melody L. Pachuau, learned Government Advocates, Mizoram for the State respondent Nos. 1 to 6. 2. The Government of Mizoram in the Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms vide Notification No. A.12018/19/2003-P&AR(GSW) dated 12.11.2003, published in the Mizoram Gazette Extraordinary on 17.11.2003, framed a statutory Rule under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, namely, "the Mizoram Education & Human Resources Development Department (School Education) (Group 'C' Post) Recruitment Rules 2003" for recruitment to the post(s) of Primary School Teacher under the Education & Human Resources Development Department (School Education), Government of Mizoram. Rule - 4 of the said 2003 Rules provides for method of recruitment, age limit, other qualification and other matters relating to the said post of Primary School Teacher under the Government of Mizoram and those have been specified in the Columns 5 to 14 of the First Schedule to the said Rule. Column 8 to the First Schedule of the said 2003 Rules prescribes educational & other qualifications required for direct recruit of Primary School Teacher as follows: "1. Higher Secondary School Leaving Certificate/Pre-University Certificate and above with Diploma/Certificate in Teachers Education of a duration of not less than 2 years or Bachelor of Elementary Education (B.El.Ed.) 2. Working knowledge of Mizo language up to Middle School Standard. For Nepali/Gorkha Primary School the candidate should possess Nepali as one of the subject either in High School Leaving Certificate or +2 Level." 3. The State respondents, without following the said 2003 Recruitment Rules, adopted a method to engage some unqualified persons as Primary School Teachers branding them as 'Education Volunteers' and in July 2006 engaged/appointed large numbers of such 'Education Volunteers' in fixed pay for a fixed term in various Government Primary Schools in the State against regular vacancy of Primary School Teachers and later extended the period of their such service. 4. 4. The petitioners being Higher Secondary School Leaving Certificate passed and Diploma Holders of two years of Teachers Education, formed an association, known as 'the Pre-Service Teacher Association' (PRESTA, in short) in the State of Mizoram and being aggrieved with such appointment of 'Education Volunteers' in the State; through its President & Secretary preferred a Writ Petition being W.P. (C) No. 2 of 2007. In the said writ petition amongst other State respondents, all such 'Education Volunteers' illegally appointed were also made party respondents. 5. The Court after hearing the parties vide Judgment & Order dated 05.12.2007 passed in said W.P. (C) No. 2/2007 held that private respondents were not legally engaged/appointed as 'Education Volunteers' and they do not have any right to continue further. By the said order dated 05.12.2007, the Court further directed the State respondents therein not to extend the engagement of the private respondents or any other 'Education Volunteers' beyond 12.12.2007 and to fill up the post in question in terms of the Recruitment Rules. 6. In terms of the direction of the Court dated 05.12.2007 passed in the aforesaid W.P. (C) No. 2/2007, the State respondents took step to fill up the posts of Primary School Teachers in the State, accordingly issued advertisement, constituted Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for selection of Primary School Teachers in terms of the aforesaid Recruitment Rules. On being recommended by the concerned DPC in the aforesaid process and in spite of the said Judgment & Order dated 05.12.2007 passed in said W.P. (C) No. 2/2007, on approval of the State Government, the Director of School Education, Mizoram by Office Order No. A.12019/1/04- DTE(EDS)/Pt dated 28.07.2008, engaged the petitioners, the Pre-Service Trainees in Education (P.S.T.E.), as 'Education Volunteers' on a fixed pay of Rs. 2,800/- per month, posting them in various Government Primary Schools of the State; specifying that their engagement is from the date of their joining until further order and that their salary shall be drawn from the Head of Account of Non-Plan Government Primary School in the Elementary Education under General Education of the State Government. 7. The State Government in the Finance Department vide Notification No. G.12017/3/2007-FIN(PRU) dated 05.09.2008 re-structured the pay scales of the employees of the Government of Mizoram with effect from 01.06.2007. 7. The State Government in the Finance Department vide Notification No. G.12017/3/2007-FIN(PRU) dated 05.09.2008 re-structured the pay scales of the employees of the Government of Mizoram with effect from 01.06.2007. By the said Notification, the State Government determined the Pay Scale of Trained Graduate & Under-Graduate Teacher in their entry Grade at Rs. 6,500 – 10,500/- per month. However, the State respondents enhanced the fixed monthly honorariums of the petitioners from Rs. 2,800/- to Rs. 7,500/- (fixed) per month. 8. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid actions of the State respondents, the petitioners, preferred another Writ Petition being W.P.(C) No. 25 of 2009 praying for direction to the State respondents that petitioners should be given the name & status of Primary School Teachers and also the scale of pay attached to the said post as per the relevant Recruitment Rules with effect from their initial date of appointment to the post of Primary School Teacher as 'Education Volunteers'. 9. During the pendency of the said W.P.(C) No. 25/2009, the State respondents convened a DPC on 07.08.2009 and as per the minutes of the said DPC held on the same date, decided to extend the engagement of the petitioners as Contract Teachers of Primary Schools, Mizoram for another period of a year w.e.f. 01.08.2009 to 31.07.2010. Accordingly, the Director of School Education, Mizoram vide Office Order No. A.12019/5/08-DTE(EDS) dated 08.09.2009 extended the service of the petitioners w.e.f. 01.08.2009 to 31.07.2010 in the fixed pay of Rs. 7,500/- per month showing them to have been engaged on contractual basis. 10. This Court vide Judgment & Order dated 19.02.2010 passed in above noted W.P.(C) No. 25/2009 came to a finding that though the petitioners are eligible for appointment of Primary School Teachers as per the existing Recruitment Rules and though they had undergone all the rigorous process of written test, personal interview as per the requirement in the Recruitment Rules; they were appointed as 'Education Volunteers' on contractual basis, which later notified to have been reengaged as Primary School Teachers on contractual basis for extended period of employment. For the said reason, the Court by the said order dated 19.02.2010 came to the conclusion that the petitioners are not entitled for a Writ of Mandamus and directed the State respondents to fill up the vacant posts of Primary School Teachers as early as possible in accordance with law. 11. For the said reason, the Court by the said order dated 19.02.2010 came to the conclusion that the petitioners are not entitled for a Writ of Mandamus and directed the State respondents to fill up the vacant posts of Primary School Teachers as early as possible in accordance with law. 11. Being aggrieved with the aforesaid Judgment & Order dated 19.02.2010 passed in W.P.(C) No. 25/2009, the petitioners preferred an appeal being Writ Appeal No. 6 of 2010. The Hon'ble Division Bench after hearing the parties, vide order dated 25.03.2010 disposed of the said W.A. No. 6/2010 with the observation that if the State respondents really required the service of the Primary School Teachers, the vacant post of Primary School Teachers shall be filled up in accordance with the relevant Rules and also by following the Constitutional Scheme on regular basis before the expiry of the terms for contractual appointment of the writ petitioners as Education Volunteers i.e. 31.07.2010; further clarifying that as the petitioners were appointed on a fixed term on contract basis up to 31.07.2010, they shall be allowed to complete the terms even if they are not recommended for regular appointment by the DPC and that if some of the writ petitioners are recommended by the DPC for regular appointment to the post of Primary School Teachers, then they shall be appointed on regular basis. 12. However, the State respondents did not comply with the said Order of the Hon'ble Court and continued to engage the petitioners on contractual basis on yearly basis up to April, 2014 at the fixed pay of Rs. 7,500/- per month up to regularisation of their service as Primary School Teachers in the State. 13. Later, on the recommendation of the Mizoram Public Service Commission (Group 'B') and in pursuance of the approval of the Government of Mizoram in the School Education Department as well as with the approval in the Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms (GSW) and with the concurrence of the Finance Department of the State; the Director of School Education, Mizoram vide Office Order No. A.40014/1/10-DTE(EDS)/IV dated 13.05.2014 regularised the services of the petitioners as Primary School Teachers in the regular scale of pay in the Pay Band – 2(b) of Rs. 9,300 – 34,800 + 4,200 Grade Pay for Trained Under Graduate Teacher with effect from issuance of the said order and posted them in their respective Schools with immediate effect and until further order, stating that their salary shall be drawn from the Head of Account of Non-Plan Government Primary School in the Elementary Education under General Education of the State Government, i.e. from the same Head of Account of the State Government when the petitioners were paid their salaries from their initial date engagement on 28.07.2008 till issuance of said order of regularisation. 14. By the said Office Order dated 13.05.2014, the Director of School Education, Mizoram also specified that in compliance of the Notification No. G.17011/2/2011-F.APF dated 27.02.2012 of the State Government in the Finance Department, past services of Contract Employees of said 211 (two hundred eleven), i.e. the petitioners herein, shall not be counted for the purpose of pensionery benefits as their services as Primary School Teachers are regularised after 01.09.2010. 15. Hence this petition by the petitioners against such action of the State respondents in denying to count their past services as continuous Contract Employees towards qualifying service for leave and pensionery benefits. 16. Mr. Sailo, learned Sr. Counsel on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the "the Mizoram New Defined Contributory Pension Scheme, 2010", having statutory force as formulated under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, came into force in the State w.e.f. 01.09.2010 and Regulation 2.1(e) of the Tier-I of the said 2010 Scheme excluded persons employed on contractual basis. 17. Mr. Sailo also stated that the State Government in the Finance Department (APF Branch) vide Notification No. G.17011/2/2011.F.APF dated 27.02.2012 partially modified the aforesaid 2010 Contributory Pension Scheme notifying that Tier-I of Para 2.1. of said 2010 Scheme shall include all Muster Roll/Contract/Adhoc/Officiating/Casual Employees etc., whose services were regularised on or after 01.09.2010, directing all head of departments of the State to take due care that the past service of any of the said categories of employees should not be taken forward/counted for the purpose of pension benefits as far as regularisation of their service that is done on or after 01.09.2010 and if there are any cases whose past-service are counted for Pensionery Benefits, the same should be cancelled. By the said Notification dated 27.02.2012, the Finance Department has notified that if any attempts are made by departments to by-pass the said order, the Chief Controller of Accounts & Treasuries Department is authorised to carefully examine and detect such cases and make necessary corrections. 18. According to Mr. Sailo the Notification dated 27.02.2012 of the Finance Department (APF Branch), on the basis of which petitioners' past service of contractual employment prior to their regularisation of services have been excluded, was challenged in a Writ Petition being W.P.(C) No. 25 of 2013 (Sh. Lalparliana Sailo & 41 others v. The State of Mizoram & 5 others) and the Hon'ble Court by its Order dated 28.05.2014 passed in the said W.P.(C) No. 25/2013 set aside and quashed the said Notification dated 27.02.2012 of the Finance Department on the ground that by the same, i.e. administrative instruction on the part of the State respondents in the Finance Department, it partially modified the 2010 Pension Scheme, having statutory force as the 2010 Pension Scheme has been formulated under Article 309 of the Constitution of India. In view of the same, by the said Order dated 28.05.2014, the Hon'ble Court also cancelled the letter No. G.19020/94/2010-CCA(Pen)/286 dated 16.10.2012 of the Director of the Accounts & Treasuries, Mizoram by which the Director of School Education, Mizoram was asked not to count the past service rendered by 41 (forty one) Contract Primary School Teachers (the petitioners of W.P.(C) No. 25/2013), whose appointment & services were regularised by the Director of School Education, Mizoram vide No. G.22015/7/10-DTE(EDS) dated 04.06.2012 counting their past service towards leave and pensionery benefits. 19. Mr. Sailo, learned senior counsel also stated that the State Government vide notification No. A.1109/5/2008-P&AR (ARW)/51 dated 10.10.2008, published in the Mizoram Gazette Extraordinary dated 23.10.2008 formulated a statutory Scheme under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, namely, "the Government of Mizoram Regularisation of Contract Employee Scheme 2008" for giving scope for regularisation of services Contractual Employees to regular vacancy under the Government of Mizoram. Mr. Mr. Sailo submitted that the said 2008 Scheme is very much in force in the State and only under the said 2008 Scheme, the State Government can regularise services of Contract Employees working in different departments of the State, who are initially engaged on due recommendation of duly constituted Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) with the prior approval of the Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms and Finance Department of the State and that Regulation 7 of the said 2008 Scheme specifically provides that on such regularisation, past services rendered by the concerned incumbent as continuous Contract Employee are counted as qualifying service for leave and pensionery benefits only. 20. As such Mr. Sailo, learned Sr. Counsel on behalf of the petitioners submitted that the second paragraph of the Office Order No. A.40014/1/10- DTE(EDS)/IV dated 13.05.2014 (Annexure-14 to the petition) so far the petitioners have been denied from counting their past services rendered by them as Contract Employees should be set aside, quashed, modified or interfered with and they should be allowed to enjoy the benefit of Old Pension Scheme prevailing in the State i.e. Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1972. 21. Mr. Sailo also placed a copy of the Judgment & Order dated 23.07.2014 passed by this Court in W.P. (C) No. 46/2013 (Mr. K. Lalthanmawia v. State of Mizoram), wherein in similarly placed situation officiating appointment of the petitioner was regularised with prospective effect from 01.06.2012 governed by the New Pension Scheme of 2010 and not by CCS (Pension), Rules, 1972 and the Court by the said order dated 23.07.2014 hold that petitioner is entitled for pension under CCS(Pension), Rules, 1972. 22. The State respondents filed their affidavit-in-opposition in the matter denying the claim of the petitioners. The State respondents submitted that the petitioners have accepted the terms and the offer of their appointments, signed the agreements for their fixed tenure of appointments on contractual basis in the fixed pay of monthly salaries and that the petitioners term of appointments were extended from time to time on execution of agreements by them. The respondents stated that the petitioners knowing well about all the terms & conditions joined the post, being aware that after completion of 5 (five) years of their service, they will be able to be regularised to the post. The respondents stated that the petitioners knowing well about all the terms & conditions joined the post, being aware that after completion of 5 (five) years of their service, they will be able to be regularised to the post. However, the State respondents stated that contractual appointments of the petitioners made on 08.09.2009 was not issued by respondent No. 4, the Secretary to the Finance Department, Government of Mizoram. 23. The respondents also contended that Rule 2(g) of the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1972 (CCS Rules, in short) clearly provides that the said Rule is not applicable to persons employed on contract except when contract provide otherwise and in the present case, the contract agreements signed by the petitioners with regard to their appointment under the Director of School Education, Mizoram; nothing has been stated with regard to their entitlement of pension. 24. The respondents further submitted that the Mizoram New Defined Contributory Pension Scheme, 2010, framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, having statutory force came into effect in the State of Mizoram from 01.09.2010 onwards and it has done away with the system of pensionery benefits in respect of Government Servants appointed on regular basis on or after 01.09.2010. 25. The respondents submitted that said CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 applies to Government Servant appointed substantively to civil service and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union which are borne on pensionable establishment and that the petitioners were appointed & engaged under Centrally Sponsored Scheme, which is not under pensionable establishment, but co-terminus with the Scheme and petitioners' appointments are not sustentative appointment to civil service and posts on pensionable establishment and therefore they are not covered by said CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 nor the Mizoram New Defined Contributory Pension Scheme, 2010 and only after appointment of the petitioners on regular basis w.e.f. 09.09.2014, the petitioners are covered by the said "the Mizoram New Defined Contributory Pension Scheme, 2010". The respondents also submitted that the petitioners belong to vocational group and their service cannot be counted for Leave benefits. 26. Mrs. The respondents also submitted that the petitioners belong to vocational group and their service cannot be counted for Leave benefits. 26. Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Government Advocate on behalf of the State respondents submitted that for the aforesaid reasons petitioners past service on contractual basis cannot be considered for any pensionery benefits and since their services have been regularised only on 13.05.2014; after the Mizoram New Defined Contributory Pension Scheme, 2010 came into force in the State w.e.f. 01.09.2010; the petitioners are not eligible to receive pension. 27. After the judgment & order dated 05.12.2007 passed by the Court in W.P. (C) No. 2/2007, the State respondents took step to fill up the posts of Primary School Teachers in the State; accordingly issued advertisement and on the recommendation of the constituted DPC, selected candidates eligible for the post of Primary School Teachers in terms of the said 2003 Recruitment Rules, including the petitioners who obtained two years Diploma in the Pre-Service Trainings in Education and fulfil the requisite eligibility criteria. But, on approval of the State Government, the Director of School Education, Mizoram by his Office Order No. A.12019/1/04-DTE(EDS)/Pt dated 28.07.2008, engaged the petitioners, as 'Education Volunteers' on a fixed pay of Rs. 2,800/- per month and posted them in various Government Primary Schools of the State stating that their engagement is from the date of their joining until further orders and that their salary shall be drawn from the Non-Plan Government Primary School in the Elementary Education under General Education Head of Account of the State Government. 28. Later with effect from 01.08.2009, the State respondents on due recommendation of the constituted DPC, service of the petitioners as Contract Teachers of Primary School of Mizoram were extended for another year in the monthly Scale of Pay of Rs. 7,500/- and for that petitioners entered into agreement with the concerned State respondents in the Education Department. This way the State respondents extended the services of the petitioners as Contract Teachers of Primary School of Mizoram on yearly basis or to the date of regularisation of their service, stating whichever is earlier. All along since 01.08.2009 petitioners services were engaged and extended on the recommendation of the duly constituted DPC and on approval of the concerned authorities like – School Education Department, Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms and Finance Department of the State of Mizoram. All along since 01.08.2009 petitioners services were engaged and extended on the recommendation of the duly constituted DPC and on approval of the concerned authorities like – School Education Department, Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms and Finance Department of the State of Mizoram. Ultimately, on the approval of the Mizoram Public Service Commission and on the approval of the School Education Department, Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms and Finance Department of the State Government; the Director of School Education, Mizoram vide Office Order No. A.40014/1/10-DTE(EDS)/IV dated 13.05.2014 regularised the services of the petitioners as Primary School Teachers with effect from the date of said order in the Pay Band - 2(b) at Rs. 9,300 – 34,800 + 4,200 Grade Pay for Trained Under Graduate Teacher clarifying that their salaries shall be debitable from the Head of Account of the Non-Plan Government Primary School in the Elementary Education under General Education of the State Government i.e. the same Head of Account of the State Government from which petitioners salaries were debited from their initial date of engagement w.e.f. 28.07.2008. 29. It is seen that "the Mizoram Education & Human Resources Development Department (School Education) (Group 'C' Post) Recruitment Rules 2003", a statutory Rule framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India is the Recruitment Rules, which is in force in the State of Mizoram for appointment of Primary School Teachers in the Government Primary Schools in the State. "The Government of Mizoram Regularisation of Contract Employee Scheme, 2008", framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, having statutory force came into force in the State since October 2008 and it provided for regularisation of services of Contractual Employees, working in different departments of the State, to regular vacancies under the Government of Mizoram on fulfilling the required conditions set forth in the said 2008 Scheme. 30. 30. Regulation 3 of the said 2008 Scheme provides that – the Scheme shall be applicable to Contractual Employees who are working under the various Departments of the State, whose engagements have been made through the duly authorised Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) with the prior approval of the Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms and Finance Department of the State and besides these whose engagement were made through the duly authorised DPC with the prior concurrence of the Finance Department alone before 06.12.2005 (i.e. before issuance of Department of Personnel & Administrative Reforms Office Memorandum No. 411016/4/88-P&AR (ARW)/45 dated 06.12.2005) and whose services are still retained by executing Deed of Contractual Agreement. The said Regulation 3 also clarified that the benefit of said 2008 Scheme is not applicable to Contractual Employees under the Centrally Sponsored Scheme (CSS) and also those re-employed pensioners on Contractual Employment. 31. Regulation 4(1) of the aforesaid 2008 Scheme provides for regularisation of Contract employees in consonance with the reservation policy adopted by the Government of Mizoram from time to time and Regulation 4(2) of the said Scheme provides that 20% (twenty percent) of vacant post under Direct Recruitment Quota may be reserved for the aforesaid employees (i.e. Contract employees). Further, Regulation 4(3) of the said 2008 Scheme provides that – any person who has been continuously engaged on Contract basis in the Department for at least 5 (five) years shall be eligible for regularisation in the existing post against which he/she has been engaged provided that such initial engagement had been done through the duly authorised Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) and he/she possess the required Educational and other qualification prescribed in the relevant Recruitment Rules, provided that such regularisation shall be considered in order of length of service in the contract employment, further providing that such regularisation shall be subject to satisfactory performance duly recorded in the Performance Reports or any other similar Report for the last 5 (five) years as may be maintained by the Department concerned. 32. Regulation 7 of the said 2008 Scheme provides that – on regularisation, past services rendered as continuous Contract Employee shall be counted as qualifying service for leave and pensionery benefits only. 33. 32. Regulation 7 of the said 2008 Scheme provides that – on regularisation, past services rendered as continuous Contract Employee shall be counted as qualifying service for leave and pensionery benefits only. 33. In the Judgments & Orders dated 19.02.2010 passed by this Hon'ble Court in W.P.(C) No. 25/2009 as well as dated 25.03.2010 passed in Writ Appeal No. 6/2010, it has already been found that the petitioners were discharging the duties on contractual basis under the State respondents in fixed monthly salaries. Therefore, it is only under the provisions of "the Government of Mizoram Regularisation of Contract Employee Scheme, 2008", the services of the petitioners as continuous Contract Employee under the Education Department, Government of Mizoram have been regularised by the State respondents w.e.f. 13.05.2014 as Primary School Teachers and there is no other statutory provisions in the State of Mizoram for regularisation of Contract Employees. It is also not the case of the State respondents that petitioners contractual employment as Teachers of Primary School under the State Government in the Education Department have not been regularised under the said 2008 Scheme. 34. It is also seen that Regulation 2.1(e) Tier-I of "the Mizoram New Defined Contributory Pension Scheme, 2010", having a statutory force as formulated under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, that came into force w.e.f. 01.09.2010 excluded persons employed on contractual basis and the said Pension Scheme of 2010, did not repeal or superseded any provisions of "the Government of Mizoram Regularisation of Contract Employee Scheme, 2008" including the provisions of Regulation 7 of the said 2008 Scheme which provides for counting of past services rendered by an incumbent as continuous Contract Employee towards qualifying service for his/her leave and pensionery benefits on regularisation of service of the said incumbent under the said 2008 Scheme. Said Regulation 7 of 2008 Scheme did not meant for or envisage for any other pensionery scheme, except the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1972, which was applicable in the State of Mizoram prior to the coming of "the Mizoram New Defined Contributory Pension Scheme, 2010" with effect from 01.09.2010. 35. Said Regulation 7 of 2008 Scheme did not meant for or envisage for any other pensionery scheme, except the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1972, which was applicable in the State of Mizoram prior to the coming of "the Mizoram New Defined Contributory Pension Scheme, 2010" with effect from 01.09.2010. 35. Further, this Hon'ble Court by Judgment & Order dated 28.05.2014 passed in the said W.P. (C) No. 25/2013 already set aside and quashed the concerned Notification No. G. 17011/2/2011-F.APF dated 27.02.2012 issued by the Finance Department of the State, by which it partially modified the statutory provisions of the aforesaid 2010 Contributory Pension Scheme, notifying that Tier-I of Para 2.1. of said 2010 Scheme shall include all Muster Roll/Contract/Adhoc/Officiating/Casual Employees etc., whose services were regularised on or after 01.09.2010 and thereby directed all head of departments of the State to take due care that the past service of any of the said categories of employees should not be taken forward/counted for the purpose of pension benefits as far as regularisation of their service that is done on or after 01.09.2010 and if there are any cases whose past-service are counted for Pensionery Benefits, the same should be cancelled. On elapse of time, said decision of the Hon'ble Court dated 28.05.2014 has already become final. 36. It is already seen that all along since their initial date of engagement w.e.f. 28.07.2008 as 'Education Volunteer' on contract basis and even thereafter, on regularisation of their services w.e.f. 13.05.2014, the salaries of the petitioners have been debited from the same Head of Account of Non-Plan Government Primary School in Elementary School under General Education and as such it can be well presumed that petitioners all along, though engaged as Contract Employees in a fixed monthly salary, worked against regular vacant sanctioned post of Primary School Teachers under the State Government. The State respondents failed to show before the Court that the petitioners were engaged as 'Education Volunteers' on contract basis for a stop-gap arrangement or under any 'Centrally Sponsored Scheme' (CSS) or against any Plan Post of a fixed period under any Scheme of the State or Central Government. The State respondents failed to show before the Court that the petitioners were engaged as 'Education Volunteers' on contract basis for a stop-gap arrangement or under any 'Centrally Sponsored Scheme' (CSS) or against any Plan Post of a fixed period under any Scheme of the State or Central Government. It is seen that initial appointment of the petitioners as Contract Teachers of Primary Schools under the Education Department, Government of Mizoram was in terms of the specifications/required eligibility criteria prescribed by the 2003 Recruitment Rules in force, which have not been denied by the State respondents. 37. As the petitioners' contractual service as Primary School Teachers in Government Primary Schools in the State have been regularised in terms of the statutory rule i.e. "the Government of Mizoram Regularisation of Contract Employee Scheme, 2008", the petitioners' entitlement are governed by the said statutory rule and the provisions prescribed in the said statutory rule must be followed strictly by the respondents. 38. For the reasons stated herein above, the direction contained in the 2nd (second) paragraph of the impugned Office Order No. A.40014/1/10- DTE(EDS)/IV dated 13th May 2014 issued by the Director of School Education, Mizoram in regularising the services of the petitioners as Primary School Teacher in the Pay Band 2(b) as Trained Under Graduate Teachers with effect from the date of issue of the order, to the effect that – "Further, in compliance of Government of Mizoram, Finance Department's Notification No. G.17011/2/2011 – F.APF dated 27.2.2012, past services of Contract employees shall not be counted for the purpose of pension benefits since these 211 (two hundreds eleven) Primary Teachers are regularised after 1.9.2010." is hereby set aside and quashed. 39. Further, on regularisation of services of the petitioners as Primary School Teachers under the State Government in the Education Department with effect from 13.05.2014 in terms of the Office Order No. A.40014/1/10- DTE(EDS)/IV dated 13th May 2014 issued by the Director of School Education, Mizoram; as provided in 'Regulation 7' of "the Government of Mizoram Regularisation of Contract Employees Scheme, 2008", the State respondents are directed to count the past services rendered by the petitioners as continuous Contract Employee as qualifying service towards their leave and pensionery benefits only and petitioners shall be paid pension as per the provisions of the Central Civil Service (Pension) Rules, 1972. 40. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this petition stands allowed. 40. With the aforesaid observation and direction, this petition stands allowed. No order as to cost.