Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 2015 (ALL)

Raj Narain Shukla v. State of U. P.

2016-05-24

UMESH CHANDRA SRIVASTAVA, V.K.SHUKLA

body2016
JUDGMENT Raj Narain Shukla is before this Court assailing the validity of the order dated 28.4.2016 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 10064 of 2009 (Raj Narain Shukla Vs. State of U.P. & others) wherein the learned Single Judge has proceeded to turn down the request, that has been so made on behalf of the petitioner appellant, for striking out the condition prescribed under Government Order dated 20.12.2001 requiring a postgraduate degree as essential qualification for the grant of benefit of promotional pay-scale to the Assistant Teacher working in LT grade. 2. From the side of the petitioner appellant it is being sought to be contended that the imposition of such a condition in the Government Order dated 20.12.2001 requiring a postgraduate degree as essential qualification for the grant of benefit of promotional pay-scale to the Assistant Teacher working in LT grade has no nexus with the object sought to be achieved, in view of this, such particular provision ought to have been struck down by the learned Single Judge and, accordingly, requisite reliefs ought to have been accorded by the learned Single Judge at the point of time when he has proceeded to consider the request of petitioner appellant. 3. Learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand, has countered the submission, so advanced, on behalf of the petitioner appellant by contending that in order to give incentive to an incumbent, who has been performing and discharging duties as Assistant Teacher in the LT grade and who has to his credit postgraduate degree, the Government Order dated 20.12.2001 has been structured and once same falls within the realm of policy decision, then learned Single Judge rightfully proceeded to reject the claim of petitioner appellant and, as such, special appeal, as it has been framed and drawn, is liable to be dismissed, accordingly. 4. After respective arguments have been advanced the factual situation that is so emerging is that petitioner appellant has come up with the precise case that condition prescribed in the Government Order dated 20.12.2001 requiring a postgraduate degree as essential qualification for the grant of benefit of promotional pay-scale to the Assistant Teacher working in LT grade is liable to be quashed. The fact of the matter is that the State Government in its wisdom has thought much more essential to extend monetary benefits to an incumbent, who has been performing and discharging duties as Assistant Teacher in LT grade but has to his credit postgraduate degree and as postgraduate degree is an essential qualification for the post of Lecturer and, in such a situation, State Government thought it proper to extend such a benefit to those incumbents, then, in our considered opinion also, as the said decision is in the realm of policy decision and petitioner appellant admittedly does not possess postgraduate degree to his credit, then as a matter of right he cannot claim that such a condition be struck down and he should brought at par alongwith other LT grade teachers, who have to their credit masters degree and have been extended the benefit of promotional pay-scale and what we find from the record in question is that petitioner appellant is as of now 67 years of age and has already attained the age of superannuation. Special appeal sans merit and same is dismissed, accordingly.