Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2017 DIGILAW 2086 (JHR)

Ram Binay Mishra v. State Of Jharkhand

2017-12-04

S.N.PATHAK

body2017
JUDGMENT S.N. Pathak, J. - Instant writ petition has been preferred by writ petitioners for a direction to refix their pay scales after adding amount of teaching allowance and interim relief in case of petitioner nos. 1 to 18, who are teachers and adding only amount of interim relief in case of petitioner at Sl. Nos. 19 and 20 who are staff of Government Aided Minority School namely St. Ignatius High School, Gumla in compliance of Resolution No. 2315, dated 20.08.2007 and Letter No. 2728, dated 26.09.2007 and also for payment of difference of arrears of salary with effect from 01.04.1997 to 31.03.2007, in compliance of Resolution No. 660/F2, dated 08.02.1999, issued by Finance Department, Government of Bihar consequent upon recommendation of 5th Pay Revision Committee because the petitioners have not been paid the actual difference of arrears of salary with effect from 01.04.1997 on account of pay revision whereas pay-scale of teachers of Nationalised Schools have been revised with effect from 01.01.1996 and they have been granted actual benefits with effect from 01.04.1997. 2. Petitioners have further prayed for quashing the Resolution No. 2315, dated 20.08.2007 and Letter No. 2728, dated 26.09.2007 to the extent it stipulates that payment of revised pay shall be implemented with effect from 01.04.2007 because once vide Resolution No. 660, dated 08.02.1999 the actual benefit of revised pay-scale is applicable to all Government employees including teachers and staffs of Nationalised Schools with effect from 01.04.1997, the respondent authorities cannot discriminate the petitioners who happen to be teachers and staff of Government Aided Minority Schools in matter of receiving actual benefits of pay revision with effect from 01.04.2007, because service conditions and pay scales of both categories of teachers and staffs are at par. 3. Petitioners have further prayed for a direction upon the respondents to pay difference of arrears of salary with effect from 01.01.2006 to 31.08.2008 on account of recommendation made by Sixth Pay Revision Committee and in compliance of Departmental Resolution No. 2956, dated 22.09.2009 which has been issued consequent upon Finance Department Resolution No. 660, dated 28.02.2009, which stipulates that pay revision of all Government employees including teachers of Nationalised Schools will be effective from 01.01.2006 and actual financial benefits shall also be admissible with effect from 01.01.2006 whereas petitioners have been granted actual benefit only with effect from 01.09.2008. 4. 4. Petitioners have further prayed for quashing Resolution No. 2956, dated 22.09.2009 to the extent it stipulates that actual benefits of Sixth Pay Revision will be admissible to the petitioners with effect from 01.09.2008 only which amounts to discrimination between two sets of teachers and staffs, when service condition and pay scale of both classes are at par and similar. 5. Mr. Bhanu Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioners assisted by Mrs. Bharti Kumari submits that petitioners had been working as Assistant Teachers in St. Ignatius High School, Gumla. Various letters and Circulars had been issued by the erstwhile State of Bihar to regulate service conditions including pay scale and other allowances which are paid to the teachers and staffs of nationalised High School and to be paid to the teachers and staffs of government aided minority schools which receive grant-in-aid from the State Government and a complete parity has to be maintained between both class of teachers and staffs because the eligibility and other criteria for appointment in both class of teachers and staffs are same. Learned counsel further submits that service conditions etc. are also same and similar in both class of schools and therefore, no discrimination should be made in the pay and allowances of both class of teachers/staffs. 6. After advancing his arguments, Mr. Bhanu Kumar, learned counsel draws attention of this Court towards Annexure-12 to the writ petition wherein petitioner has enclosed order dated 21.04.2017, passed in W.P.(S) No. 4284 of 2016. Learned counsel further brought to the notice of this Court a copy of the order dated 07.11.2017, passed in W.P.(S) No. 3986 of 2017 and submits that in both these cases, similar issue has been decided by this Court and as such, this writ petition may also be disposed of in similar terms. 7. Counter affidavit has not been filed by the respondents. However, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State does not dispute the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner. 8. In the circumstances, this writ petition is also allowed in terms of order passed in W.P.(S) No. 4284 of 2016 as case of the petitioners herein is found to be same and similar to the petitioners therein. However, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State does not dispute the contention of learned counsel for the petitioner. 8. In the circumstances, this writ petition is also allowed in terms of order passed in W.P.(S) No. 4284 of 2016 as case of the petitioners herein is found to be same and similar to the petitioners therein. Petitioners are entitled for re-fixation of their salary in revised pay scales with effect from 01.01.1996 after quantifying the amount of interim relief and teaching allowance in view of Letter No. 2728, dated 26.09.2007. The respondents are directed to make entire payments with all consequential benefits to the petitioners within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.