Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 2084 (JHR)

Sushila Toppo v. State of Jharkhand

2017-12-04

S.N.PATHAK

body2017
ORDER : The petitioners have approached this Hon'ble Court with a prayer to pay to the non-teaching staffs of the schools of regular scale of pay with effect from the respective dates of their appointment and all arrears since 1.1.1982 in terms of the principle of "equal pay for equal work" as are being paid to the non-teaching staff of similarly situated appointed non-teaching staffs of Project High Schools under the Government scheme. Further prayer has also been made to give all dues to the non-teaching staff• of the schools of the petitioners in the refixed pay scales. 2. The petitioners are working in taken over schools of the State Government which were established under the scheme of the State Government under the sixth five year plan. In each of the Project High Schools altogether 9 posts of teachers were sanctioned, out of which three posts were for language, another three posts were for humanity and rest three posts were for Science subject. It was also decided that all the appointments of teachers and staff would be done by the Governing Body of the respective Project Schools presided over by the Regional Deputy Director of Education and the District Education Officer. The Dy. Director of Education and the Dist. Education Officer by virtue of his post become the ex-officio Secretary of all the Governing Body of the Project High Schools whereas the Block Development Officer became a member. These appointments were to be made after inviting applications through advertisement. The petitioners were appointed on different dates, as is evident from appointment letters of the petitioners issued vide office order of schools falling under the jurisdiction of respondent no. 5 including the Project of Lohardaga district at Kudu and Irgaon. By issue of directions as contained in letter no. 705 dated 12.10.1982, the State Government decided to take over all the Project Schools, so established, and till further orders are passed in this regard, the powers were delegated to the District Education Officer for appointment of teachers and other staff. It was also decided by the State Government that a panel be prepared for teachers and other staff who have already been appointed by the Managing Committee of the School. Thereafter, vide memo no. It was also decided by the State Government that a panel be prepared for teachers and other staff who have already been appointed by the Managing Committee of the School. Thereafter, vide memo no. 2513/82 dated 6.5.1982, issued by the State Government, 34 Project High School were notified to be taken over by the State Government under Section 3(2) of the Act with effect from 1.1.1982. The Regional Deputy Director of Education directed the District Education Officer, Lohardaga to prepare a panel of teachers and other staff appointed on 1.1.1982 or thereafter for being approved as Government permanent teachers and other staffs as they were appointed against the sanctioned posts. Pursuant to the decision as contained in letter dated 6.5.1982, the District Education Officer, Ranchi (as then Lohardaga was within the District of Ranchi) issued appointment letters to all eligible teachers and staffs from the respective dates of their appointments. The Project School of the petitioner was also taken over by the State Government and all the teachers and other staff who were working in these schools also became the Government School teachers and staff with effect from the date of, their respective appointments. Further vide letter no. 840 dated 25.10.1983 the State Government gave recognition and took over the management and control of Project High School, Bakhri, Block at Begusarai, the trained teachers were given the graduate trained scale of As. 850-1360 w.e.f. the actual date of their appointments. It is further stated that without obtaining the approval of the School Service Board for regularization of the services of the teachers and non-teaching staff of the petitioners' schools, the respondents purported to decide that the teachers and other staffs of the Project High Schools in Chhotanagpur Division, north and south, who have been appointed be given the regular scale of pay w.e.f. 1.4.1986 and the respondents have further decided that the payment of salary of teachers and other staff who have been appointed by the School Managing Committee or the District Education Officer till 13.2.1985 on daily wages or otherwise be also entitled to the benefits of regular pay Some of the persons who were appointed as teachers at Project High School, when not given the regular scale of pay moved before this Hon'ble Court in C.W.J.C. No. 3012 of 1985 for giving them regular scale of pay w.e.f. date of their initial appointments. This Hon'ble Court vide order dated 1.5.1986 disposed of the writ application with a direction to the State Government to decide the case of the writ petitioners expeditiously. In compliance thereof, the State Government vide office order no. 172 dated 17.10.1987 granted regular scale of pay to the writ petitioners of the aforesaid writ application. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners strenuously urges that vide memo no. 575 dated 25.8.1999 issued by the District Education Officer, Lohardaga, for Project Girls High School, Irgaon, and memo no. 576 dated 28.8.1999 for Project Girls High School, Kudu, the petitioners are entitled for pay scale as indicated therein with effect from 1.1.1982 or the date of their respective appointments whichever is later but the same has not been paid to the petitioners as yet. This Hon'ble Court after considering the claim of the petitioner in W.P.(S) No. 3122/2005 disposed of the case vide order dated 14.10.2009, and held that clause three of the impugned notification dated 10.5.2005 was not sustainable and directed that the writ petitioners were entitled for pay scale from 9.4.1982 i.e. the date of their initial appointment. Learned counsel further argues that the petitioners are entitled to payment from their initial date of appointment as would appear from Annexure-1 to the writ application and as such respondents, are liable to pay the salary from the initial date of appointment as indicated in Annexure-1 in respect of non-teaching staff of the school but arbitrarily the respondents have fixed the scale of petitioners from 1.4.1986 ignoring the fact that other non-teaching staff of similarly situated schools have been given scale from 1.1.1982 or from date of initial appointment. 4. Per contra, counter-affidavit has been filed. Learned counsel for the State vehemently opposes the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. V. Sheonath and argues that in view of letter no. 14 dated 10.5.2005 and Annexure-7, the petitioners are entitled for their pay scale and pay fixation only from 1986 and not from their initial date of appointment. However, learned counsel for the respondents very fairly draws the attention of the court to Wards paragraph 12 of the counter-affidavit and submits that the State Government is actively considering to take a decision with regard to payment of salary in regular pay scale to the teachers of Project School of 1981-1982 phase from date of their joining or 1.1.1982 whichever is later. Status of payment of salary of such teachers has been called for from respective District Education Officer. Since the number of such teachers is large, approval of Finance Department and of Cabinet Ministers has to be taken and only after that the case of the petitioners will be considered. 5. Be that as it may having gone through the rival submissions of the parties, this court is of the considered view that case of the petitioner needs consideration. Since there was already an order of Hon'ble Patna High Court in C.W.J.C. No. 3137 of 1993 and taking all the aspects into consideration, the Hon'ble Patna High Court disposed of the said writ application with an observation that since the respondents have not denied that teachers of several other Project High Schools have been granted regular pay scale from the date of their initial appointment, the same treatment should also be given to these teachers also. It is also not denied that this court in C.W.J.C. No. 3979 of 1983 disposed of on 30.12.1985 had made out rule that the teachers of the Project High Schools are entitled to claim the regular scale from the date of their initial recruitment. Since the petitioners of abovementioned cases are already getting their pay scale from the date of their initial appointment and in view of the fact that same view was reiterated in W.P.(S) No. 1589 of 2005 disposed of on 29.7.2009 and also in W.P.(S) No. 3122 of 2005 disposed of on 4.10.2009, the present petitioners are also entitled for the same pay scale and the pay fixation• which has been given to similarly situated teachers of the Project High School. The contention of the learned counsel for the respondents is not acceptable to this court in view of the fact that letter no. 14 dated 10.5.2005 has already been quashed in W.P.(S) No. 3122 of 2005 and hence the submission of learned counsel for the respondents is misconceived. Since this court has already considered the earlier order of Hon'ble Patna High Court and a direction has been given to respondent authorities for payment of arrears of salary. 14 dated 10.5.2005 has already been quashed in W.P.(S) No. 3122 of 2005 and hence the submission of learned counsel for the respondents is misconceived. Since this court has already considered the earlier order of Hon'ble Patna High Court and a direction has been given to respondent authorities for payment of arrears of salary. The respondents after consideration have already paid benefits to other similarly situated persons from the date of initial appointment, I hereby direct the respondents to consider the case of the present petitioners considering the earlier orders of Hon'ble Patna High Court and also in view of the fact that similarly situated persons have already been considered and are getting the salary from the date of their initial appointment. As the petitioners have already preferred a representation before the respondents which is also evident from para 12 of the counter-affidavit, I hereby, direct the respondents to pass a reasoned order on their representation keeping in view the earlier orders of this Hon'ble Court and also in view that similarly situated persons have already been given the benefit of pay fixation and arrears of salary from the date of initial recruitment. 6. As it has already been admitted by the respondents that the petitioners are entitled for the benefits and they are considering for payment of benefits from 1.1.1982 or from the date of their initial joining, whichever is later, let such a decision be taken in accordance with law within a period of ten weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and if the petitioners are found to be entitled for the benefits, the same may be extended to them with all consequential benefits within a period of four weeks thereafter. 7. The writ petition stands allowed with the above observations.