Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1048 (ALL)

SURIJ PAL SINGH v. STATE OF U. P.

2016-03-28

H.G.RAMESH, RAGHVENDRA KUMAR

body2016
JUDGMENT By the Court.—Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Standing Counsel and perused the record. 2. By means of this Special Appeal, the appellant has prayed for setting aside the judgment dated 19.5.2014 passed by the learned Single Judge, dismissing the writ petition being misconceived. 3. According to the appellant, the appellant/petitioner was appointed as Headmaster of the Institution, which is a private institution, on 16.7.1977 in the pay scale as prescribed by the State Government. On 25.4.1989 the Basic Education Officer, Banda accorded approval to the appointment of the appellant/petitioner. On 26.6.1997 the Regional Assistant Director of Education (Basic) granted permanent recognition to the institution as a junior high school. The appellant/petitioner had not been paid salary in the pay scale as prescribed by the State Government. 4. Aggrieved, the appellant/petitioner filed writ petition before this Court which was decided on 7.1.2013 directing the Basic Education Officer to consider and decide the representation of the appellant/petitioner. On 30.4.2013 the Basic Education Officer hold that the appellant/petitioner to be a part time teacher, was entitled to minimum of wages at the rates applicable to the skilled workers in terms of Minimum Wages Act. Aggrieved by the said order, the appellant/petitioner again filed writ petition before this Court, which was allowed by the learned Single Judge on 2.7.2013. The Basic Education Officer rejected the representation of the appellant/petitioner on 11.10.2013. The appellant/petitioner filed representation before the Regional Assistant Direction of Education (Basic) on 26.12.2013, which is still pending for consideration. 5. The appellant/petitioner once again approached this Court by filing the writ petition, which has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge on 19.5.2014 being misconceived. It is against this order, the appellant/petitioner has filed this special appeal. 6. Admittedly, unless any ingredients which attract the running of the institution, either in grant-in-aid or with the assistance of the Government, the obligations for the appellant/petitioner would be to pursue the Civil Court to seek payment as per the provisions of U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972. Since the appellant/petitioner is working in a private institution and is governed with the provisions of U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972, hence in order to redress his grievance with regard to payment of salary, the appropriate remedy for the appellant/petitioner would be to approach before the appropriate Civil Courts. 7. Admittedly, the institution is not on the grant-in-aid list. Since the appellant/petitioner is working in a private institution and is governed with the provisions of U.P. Basic Education Act, 1972, hence in order to redress his grievance with regard to payment of salary, the appropriate remedy for the appellant/petitioner would be to approach before the appropriate Civil Courts. 7. Admittedly, the institution is not on the grant-in-aid list. There does not appear to be any doubt that the institution is a Junior High School. The appellant/petitioner has filed representation on 26.12.2013 before the Regional Assistant Direction of Education (Basic), Jhansi Region, Jhansi, respondent No. 3 regarding payment of salary etc. as applicable to the employees of the recognised and grant-in-aid institution. The said representation is still pending for consideration. 8. Be that as it may, any Government order which necessarily gives right to the appellant/petitioner to get salary etc. as applicable to the employees of the recognised and grant-in-aid institution to be paid by the management, then the remedy lies to the appellant/petitioner to approach the concerned authority to pass appropriate order, directing the management to take necessary steps for payment of salary to the appellant/petitioner as applicable to the employees of the recognised and grant-in-aid institution. 9. Accordingly, the appellant/petitioner is directed to approach before the Regional Assistant Direction of Education (Basic), Jhansi Region, Jhansi, respondent No. 3 with a fresh representation alongwith a copy of this order, who shall consider and decide the same by a speaking and reasoned order, in accordance with law, after hearing the management of the institution, within a period of one month from the date of filing of such representation. However, remedy for the appellant is to approach Civil Court for recovery of salary difference as arrears of salary or to approach the tribunal, if the same is constituted under the law. 10. Since the appellant/petitioner has not made out any new ground in the special appeal in appellate jurisdiction to entertain the writ petition, hence this Court is not inclined to entertain this special appeal. 11. With the above observations, the special appeal is disposed of.