Research › Search › Judgment

Karnataka High Court · body

2019 DIGILAW 573 (KAR)

Mohan Venkatesh Deshpande v. State Of Karnataka

2019-03-06

KRISHNA S.DIXIT

body2019
JUDGMENT : Krishna S. Dixit, J. - The petitioner a retired teacher of Aided Educational Institution, is calling in question the fixation of 06.07.2016 to be the effective date for grant of increments under the Government order dated 14.06.2012, a copy whereof is at Annexure-'C. After service of notice, the respondents have entered appearance through the learned AGA Sri. A. R. Rodrigues. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner Sri. Ramesh Zirali, appearing for the counsel on record vehemently submits that the service conditions of the employees of Aided Educational Institutions are governed by the Provisions of Section 87 of the Karnataka Educational Act, 1983; the said section provides that the service conditions of employees of these Educational Institutions shall be on par with those of corresponding category of employees of Government Institutions; therefore, if the increments are granted to the similarly circumstanced employees of the Government schools with effect from 14.06.2012, under the Order at Annexture-'C', the same cannot be postponed by the Government qua the employees of other institutions as has been done, under the impugned order dated 06.07.2016 at Annexure-'D. 3. The learned AGA Sri. A.R. Rodrigues opposes the writ petition stating that the grant of increments is a matter left to the decision of the Government of the day; several factors having financial implications enter the domain of such decision making; it is not that no increments are granted to the petitioner, but the granting of same is postponed for the best reasons in the Executive wisdom. So arguing, he seeks dismissal of the writ petition. 4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGA. I have perused the papers, and also certain decisions rendered by Co-ordinate Benches of this Court, in similar matters. 5. The mandate for the grant of parity of service conditions is contained in the proviso to Section 87, inserted by way of amendment Act No. 4 of 2015 which reads as under; "Provided further that conditions of service of the employees working in aided educational institutions shall be as such as may be determined by the State Government from time-to-time." 6. The object of this proviso is to work out a parity in the matter of service conditions of employees of Private Aided Institutions qua the employees of the Government Schools. 7. The object of this proviso is to work out a parity in the matter of service conditions of employees of Private Aided Institutions qua the employees of the Government Schools. 7. The Government by its' order dated 14.06.2012 at Annexure-'C' has granted certain increments to the employees of the Government schools with effect from 01.04.2012. The said order reads as under; (Vernacular matter omitted.. .Ed.) 8. Subsequently, the Government has issued the order dated 06.07.2016 at Annexure-'D' whereby the benefits of increments granted to Government School Teachers under the earlier Government Order dated 14.06.2012 at Annexure-'C' are made available to the employees of the Private Aided Educational Institutions with prospective effect from 06.07. 2016 i.e. the date of the order at Annexure-'D'. This is plainly discriminatory in as much as, the job of a Private School Teacher, is not different from that of a Government School Teacher; both they make equal and valuable contribution to the building of the Nation. 9. The Co-ordinate Benches of this Court vide judgment dated 08.02.2011 in WP Nos. 7935-7947 of 2010(S-RES) and another judgment dated 31.07.2012 in WP No. 68921/2010(S-R) have echoed the same thing. Nothing is pointed out as to why this Court should tread a different path from the one shown by these two judgments coupled with the mandate of the second proviso in question. 10. Justice Rama Jois in his "Services Under the State", 2007 Edition, at page 667, writes: "When under the service rules a civil servant is entitled to get the periodical increments as of course, he cannot be denied the increment unless it is withheld as a measure of penalty or it is subject to acquiring any prescribed qualification. In the absence of any prescription of qualification as a condition for earning increments, increments due to a Government servant cannot be withheld on the ground that he is not eligible." 11. In the above circumstances, this writ petition succeeds; a writ of mandamus issues to the official respondents to extend to the petitioner the benefit of increments under Government Order dated 14.06.2012 at Annexure-'C', on par with the employees of the State Institutions with effect from 14.06.2012. 12. Time for compliance is three months.